>Hi Mike:
>
>Are we reading the same thing? Ken says :-
>
>>If a developer wishes to distribute the Visual FoxPro runtime with an application, the runtime may only operate in conjunction with a Microsoft Windows platform
>
>He is using the word "may" meaning "you have permission to" and not "may" meaning "you might stand a chance of it running in". Your intepretation of the above lends the possibility that the VFP runtimes may or may not function correctly even when running in/with a Windows platform.
>
>FWIW, IMHO Ken's clarification is about as clear as mud. Its says very little and is open to interpretation, as indeed you have chosen to interpret what you have seen in a way that you wish to.
>
>Now if it said that you could distribute the runtimes to a non-Windows platform as long as there is a VFP licence purchased for each target machine, now that would be a different matter altogether. But it doesn't say that does it? What it implies is that if you do anything other than use the runtimes on a Windows platform, then you are "on your own" and you should seek legal counsel.
>
>Best

Gary,

It is you who choose to interpret Ken's statement as ambiguous. I'll take him at his word that it constitutes a clarification. Since this statement follows Whil Hentzen's direct inquiry as to the permissibility of running VFP applications on Linux and it says nothing that could clearly be interpreted as a prohibition against such usage, there can be only one clear interpretation of its meaning. Had Ken entitled his message as "Obfuscation" instead of "Clarification", I might be inclined to inquire further. As it stands, I'm satisfied that the meaning is perfectly clear, and from my perspective there is no need for further clarification.

Mike