To sue someone on an IP case, you need to prove a significant business prejudice;

MS benefits from VFPA.


>>Hi JR,
>>
>>In Message#1662869, Rick Hodgin claims one or more of Chen's products violate the Microsoft VFP9 EULA and hence are not legal for use in the US (and perhaps other jurisdictions).
>>
>>That may have an effect on people or companies considering those products.
>>You're the most experienced user of those products I know of. Would you or Chen care to comment?
>
>I think this is impossible to answer, as it depends on jurisdiction of customer AND willingness to test borders.
>Usually homeland of customer, not US as site of MS/origin defines the framework - esp. as MS often has daughter companies in customer homelands. There is no "The Law", but a myriad of locally binding and sometimes enforced sets of legal rules.
>
>Speaking from German/probably EU POV, fixing errors via decompiling is ok, especially if maintainance is halted.
>I am quite certain that anything sold to existing vfp customers patching a somewhere installed version would be totally ok.
>Selling a patched version - esp to non-vfp customers - is clearly murky ;-)))
>
>As Chen has quit a few offerings, the specific program - with the points of worry - should be spelled out.
>
>A Vfp-C++ Compiler developed in White Room probably would be ok. From the mess of Google vs. Oracle on Java even under US rules a language does not fall under IP, APIs might, implementaions (copied...) do. US ways of handling IP are often more restricted/restrictive/customer unfriendly compared to other [developed] countries.
>
>Anything decompiled/generated from vfp files could be problematic, with the dichotomic of Chen-product buyer having a vfp license or not thrown in.
>
>But as vfp is defunct now for lots of years, even decompilation might be seen not as harsch as in 2004 for vfp.
>
>And I will not respect any EULA rules presented AFTER sale transaction is finished. If MS "wishes" to spec rules, clear the matter before the sale is conducted/payment made. Otherwise the "meeting of minds" can never happen. If I am presented with such rules in advance, I can decide to buy knowing them and then I will honor them or seek another offering/solution.
>
>If MS is eager to close the deal without pestering customers with the wishes they want to be the basis of the transaction and wants to spring such clauses after deal is made, I refuse to acknoledge them - such screens are nothing but nag screens I refuse to acknoledge.
>
>Restrictions like # of computers to install, spelled out well in advance I will honor - IF I decide to buy (usually only if totally necessary and single license), things I use on day to day basis are selected with many bonus points for unhindered installs on any machine I own (and/or temporarily work with), more bonus points if source is given or at least can be bought as an option.
>
>But if Chens offerings were to only operate from ANY already installed vfp9, patching/adding/overwriting some of those files, legally worried minds might make the jump with less worries. Sadly I think that such a move will NOT result in an abundance of sales/revival of vfp interest.