Ed,

I do respect your standpoint, but i think you missed the point.

a. I do reject software piracy, and will not coorperate with this.
b. I don't own any illegal software and will not because i want to make a living out of this.

the one thing i want to say is that under very limited circumstances I don't have problems with it if:

- The illegal software is not reselled
- The illegal software is not used by other means than 'have a look'
- You throw it away when you've had your look or have purchased it.

Lets call this demoing.

You frequently used the word piracy. But this word piracy is at least a bit strong if a company owns 300 licenses for 301 machines where the software is installed.

Last year I called MS about a license I own of MS office (english version). I did ask if I may or may not install the dutch version. Ms told me i've had to buy the dutch version. Sorry, but I find this reaction of MS way overdone.

The main point is that you can't see it too much in black and white. Piracy is one of the things I find most rejectable... But if i install VFP on two different machines when I own 1 license (I'm the only person who uses VFP) and serveral upgrade licenses (FP 2.0 Dos, FPW 2.5, FP 2.6, FPW 2.6, VFP 3.0, VFP 5.0) I don't have too much problems with that.

Maybe, your history is clean, But if everyone is honest we all have at least on time broken the law when it comes to licensing. Thinking that we're clean is the most worse form of hypocrism.

I'm very sorry if you'll find me a thief by thinking this way. I really respect your contribution to the VFP community and have very much respect of your knowledge but i really have a more nuanced view of licensing violation. If my opinion hurts your respect towards me, i'm very sorry, but i can't change the way I feel about this subject)

Regards, Walter