Is this not a clear case where playerglobal.swc could be 'stubbed-out' to side-step the dependency?
On Thursday, April 26, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > > > > On 4/26/12 6:09 AM, "olegsivo...@gmail.com (mailto:olegsivo...@gmail.com)" > <olegsivo...@gmail.com (mailto:olegsivo...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > On the other hand, playerglobal.swc library isn't a separate product > > distributed by Adobe. > > > > It can be downloaded from the FlashPlayer page. > > > > I mentioned this problem before, but the discussion got carried away in a > > different direction, so I'll repeat. It is possible to completely replace > > playerglobal.swc with an alternative, although it will take time to write > > it and there would be a chance of it being misaligned with the real player > > API, but it would ultimately solve all possible licensing issues. > > > > I'll ask legal about this, but it might fall under the reverse engineering > restriction. > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > >
