But the modern EULA requires a lawyer to interpret the leagalese. (Most of us just wing it with a prayer.) When I bought Turbo Pascal (i.e. the Turbo Pascal License) I could read the EULA and be reasonably sure I understood it. It is near hopeless with this modern gobbledygook.

Back in the dim time, inventing new things with purchased software was considered creative, inovative and desirable. Now it is considered riskey, objectionable and illegal because it threatens monopolistic practices.

The problem here is that clearly MS isn't trying to protect its interest in VFP. Rather it appears what MS is trying to protect its interest in Windows at the expense of VFP. I expect there are many compaanies that would not mind if we got their Windows products running under Linux because they are not in the operating system business.

Yes, I try to protect my interests when I develop products for clients, but I consider my interests to be more modest than the empirical designs of many large corporations. I also rely to a large extent on the good will of my clients, which would be hurt if I got too fanatical and legalistic about our relationships.

...Jim

>>Remember when programming was fun and didn't require hiring a lawyer and an accountant to be enjoyed?
>
>Yes, but then their have always been lawyers drawing up EULAs. MS is not the only ones trying to protect their interests. When you develop an app, do you not try to protect your interests?