On 7 Nov 2002, at 0:52, Mike MacNamara wrote: > > Hi Folks > I was going to keep out of this, I am not going to takes sides. > BUT, there seems to be an opinion that the License controlled by > Wolfgang is a final solution to the SMSQ debate.
Well, legally - yes. > I would just like to note that several folks have not agreed to > this license, Indeed. > else they would have asked Wolfgang to be a > reseller, surely then, as they do not wish to agree to new terms, they > must be legally able to continue as they did before the license was > envisaged, No, sorry, this is wrong. If you don't agree with the licence, then you stop. > in other words before they can be held to have to comply > with a new set of rules, they would have to agree these changes. NO. Sorry,, this sounds harsh, but the licence holder may change the licence. If you don't agree wiht the licence, then you just must walk away. > Otherwise the new license would not apply to them. You can't decide to > change the terms of sale, long after you sold the item, without the > consent of the buyer. True - so nothing changes WITH THE ITEMS THEY HAVE SOLD UNDER THE OLD LICENCE. > If they don't want to be held liable to this > license, why should they pay a new charge, they will be able to > continue with the contract they already have In this respect, you are right. But, they are selling new versions now.... Wolfgang
