On 10/26/05, The Irrelevant Elephant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hank williams wrote: > > Throwing "unnecessary spanners in the machine" is to some extent what > > the "victims" of open source often feel is happening. I am sure > > microsoft feels linux is "unnecessary." > > Not a particularly fair analogy, though. For starters I don't think the > Linux community in general give a rat's buttock what Microsoft thinks .. > whereas we do care about what Macromedia think. >
Ok, well, then we should stop the red5 project, because I am *sure* that MM doesnt like it. If they did, then no reverse engineering would be necessary. They would have already provided the protocol specs (years ago). The fact is they charge $4500 for a 10mps server that can serve mayber 30-40 quality streams at one time. They seek hundreds of thousands of dollars in licensing fees from large scale customers. No sane software company would wish for a free alternative to this, and thus far from a business perspective they have not in any way signaled that they would like for there to be a free alternative out there. > Also the Linux community have no interest in the plight of Windows > (except for maybe wishing it into the gutter) .. whereas here we are all > targeting the same Flash Player. > > Given that the open source flash tools are designed and built to > /enhance/ the Flash platform .. I really don't think you can compare. > This may be true. But again, I think a primary motivation (though not the only motivation) for red5 is the *outrageous* pricing model of fcs/fms. I dont think the red5 guys are going "gee if MM feels threatened maybe we shoulnt do this because they might not like us". I suspect strongly that MM will feel that red5 reduces revenue. Does this mean that the red5 guys are or arent concerned with the "plight" of adobe/macromedia, a 10+ billion dollar company? > > I would agree with a more conciliatory tone, were it not for the fact > > that Mike Chambers comments and legal reference are totally unfounded. > > It is clear he is not versed in the law on this subject, and I doubt > > he has contacted internal MM counsel on his references and statement. > > By making wrong statements here that dampen enthusiasm or create fear, > > whether purposefully or not, he is engaging in Macromedia FUD. > > For what purpose? I really don't think Mike is intentionally trying to > spread FUD. As I said already, if anything I suspect he's just trying > to help us see where the boundaries are. As I said, whether it is purposeful or not, I think it is FUD, and I think it is problematic. Nothing Mike has said has > dampened enthusiasm or created fear .. it's just brought certain > considerations that have thus far been swept under the carpet into the > forefront of everybody's mind. > > > Personally, I dont think this can be stood for. I think people, and > > companies, should stand up for what they believe in and play it > > totally straight. Mr Chambers is either not playing it straight, or he > > is not fully knowledgeable. Either way, it is problematic for people > > who are primarily technical on this list and are perhaps more > > succeptible to the big bad wolf warning them to hear such uninformed > > messages. > > I do understand where you are coming from, really I do. However I do > think you are perhaps reading too much into it. It would serve no > purpose to embrace osflash with one hand, and slap it with the other. > Hence I don't think there is any underlying motive. > Legal issues like this are life and death. I dont think there is any way to read too much into it. I judge by the act without regard to the underlying motive. If you shoot me, I dont care whether you really meant to hit some other guy. You still shot me. > Still, it's good to hear your opinion :) Thank you. I enjoy debating these issues, and through discussion, gaining clarity. I hope no one takes offense at anything I say. I find everyone on this group to be incredibly intellectually stimulating and I truly appreciate the opportunity to share my opinion. Regards Hank _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
