> In my opinion, the purpose of this license clause is to make > sure there will be only *one* Flash Player (as a browser > plug-in) and as far as I'm concerned, that's ok..
I wonder what their stance is when it comes to SWF->XAML. An OS project that makes XAML files from SWFs could be a very real threat in a few years' time. Don't they have to come down hard on anything that converts SWF to any open format? As long as that exists, someone else can always take the output and create a player without risk. For browser playback, XAML is probably their only worry, but what a worry that is... With that on the horizon I can imagine that they'll soon be a whole lot more aggressive in protecting the player. I also wonder how the legal side of things work for individuals outside the US ;) /Jonas -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.9/216 - Release Date: 2005-12-29
_______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
