Information générale
Catégorie:
Conférences & événements
>Owners may have the right to dictate how their work is "displayed", but they have to be clear about it. MS hasn't made this clear.
>
If there is ambiguity - then it is incumbent on the licensee to get clarification.
>
You keep saying that "Windows subsidizes ..." as if it were a fact. Perhaps our definitions differ but I still don't see the economics to justify that stance.
>
Then you explain why under Windows - it is permissible to use the royalty-free runtimes - and under Linux - it is not.
>
Doesn't sound much different from that of a user who purchases a VFP "app" and then "has to buy" Windows.
>
But you don't have to buy Windows in order to use Fox. You do need windows to use the royalty-free runtimes.
>
IMO, Whil could have (at least) continued his pursuits in the interests of "educational purposes", which IS protected by "fair use".
>
Last I saw, Whil is engaged in commerce as is FoxTalk.
>That was my point: Where is the "subsidy" ?
MS allowing you to distribute royalty-free under Windows.
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement