On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Uri Bruck wrote:
>
>
> Which can be done in court behind closed doors.
> Moot point.
>
But then those people in the court will see that it's not the same.
Regards,
Shlomi Fish
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
>
> > Sorry, but you're wrong..
> >
> >
Which can be done in court behind closed doors.
Moot point.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> Sorry, but you're wrong..
>
> Since most of Linux applications are open source - they cannot say it's
> stolen, cause if they'll say that - then they'll have to show their code
> and prove
SF>> According to this kind of logic, MS would actually want their code to be
SF>> stolen. Let's get serious: if an open-source code implements something
No. The loss would be much greater than the benefit. But if it's _already_
stolen anyway, why not to use it?
SF>> a copyrighted code and use i
Gentlemen,
Please stop this.
During 1996 I worked at Mainsoft porting OLE2, regedit and almost every
other piece of the Microsoft development environment to various Unixes.
The source code is of such uniformly poor quality that no open source
effort would accept it as the basis for any developmen
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> Moreover, they don't have to prove anything. Just the fact that developers
> of project X will be engaged in legal battles instead of developing code,
> will be enough to drive volonteers and donations (especially from
> commercial enti
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> HBH>> Since most of Linux applications are open source - they cannot
> HBH>> say it's stolen, cause if they'll say that - then they'll have
> HBH>> to show their code and prove that it's the same...
>
> Not at all. They will claim thei
--
Erez Doron
Infineon Technologies Savan
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And who said that microsoft was really compormised, maybe this is what
thay want the world to think. maybe it can be use against Open-Source
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
> HBH>> Since
And who said that microsoft was really compormised, maybe this is what
thay want the world to think. maybe it can be use against Open-Source
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
> HBH>> Since most of Linux applications are open source - they cannot
> HBH>> say it's stolen, cause if
HBH>> Since most of Linux applications are open source - they cannot
HBH>> say it's stolen, cause if they'll say that - then they'll have
HBH>> to show their code and prove that it's the same...
Not at all. They will claim their IP was stolen and their code, obtained
by illegal means, was used in
Sorry, but you're wrong..
Since most of Linux applications are open source - they cannot say it's
stolen, cause if they'll say that - then they'll have to show their code
and prove that it's the same...
Hetz
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
>
> AJ>> Apparantely, the Windows and MS Offic
AJ>> Apparantely, the Windows and MS Office source code was stolen (I'm not
AJ>> joking here).
AJ>>
AJ>> Take a look at MSNBC:
AJ>> http://www.msnbc.com/news/481927.asp
Actually, this is very bad news. Now nothing stops Microsoft lawyers from
twarting any compatibility effort not driven by Micro
Apparantely, the Windows and MS Office source code was stolen (I'm not
joking here).
Take a look at MSNBC:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/481927.asp
(or open your TV and listen to CNN/BBC)
- Aviram
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EM
12 matches
Mail list logo
