Mike, I know you know more about the interal squablings at MM over these projects, and it seems like your comments are trying to "warn" us that we can't take "no comment" as "permission".  The problem is, if MM comes out and tries to stop Red5, then they have to justify not going after AMFPHP and openAMF as well.  Whether that's legally true or not, it certainly will be a perception and PR nightmare for MM to handle.

Right now, I know you're an advocate of OS Flash projects, but if you're the liason between flashers and MM, are you at total conflict of interest at this point with your employeer and thats why we're getting fragmented signals?  I'm sure *you* wouldn't consider them fragmented, but you have alot of us sitting here going "well, what do you mean exactly?" 

I know you don't want to be the "bad-guy" in all of this, and I don't think anyone perceives you that way, but at the same time, your's is the email that sparked most of the discussion by putting the carrot out there without any visible string or indication that the carrot would ever fall.  So, in a way, I feel like MM is showing its teeth through you right now.  It'd be nice to hear otherwise.

On 10/26/05, Mike Chambers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi. My intent was not to spread any FUD. However, this is an important
issue, and one which hasnt really been discussed.

One thing that I have personally seen over the past couple of months is
people becoming more and more bolder about talking about reverse
engineering protocols, tools, formats etc. This starts to get into
sensitive areas.

At some point, the conversations / actions are going to go over the
line, and Macromedia or some other company will have to respond. That is
not something that I think that anyone wants.

The assumption in the OSFlash community seems to be that because we
haven't done anything in the past, that ANYTHING is ok. You can see this
in the all comments pointing to AMFPHP as justification that other
projects are "ok". You can also see this in the comments on the
Screenweaver blog:

--
In practice though, distribution of the player with swf2exe's has always
be condoned.
--
( http://www.vanrijkom.org/archives/2005/08/licensed_to_fla.html)

i.e. because we haven't done anything in the past, people are assuming
we will never do anything, regardless of what is going on.

mike chambers


_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org



--
John Grden - Blitz
_______________________________________________
osflash mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org

Reply via email to