15 Mar
2005
15 Mar
'05
5 a.m.
--- Alex IoIonescuioionucuivideotrona> wrote:
This climate of paranoia is getting to my nerves.
You could at least try to be civil in your discussion. Some of us have spent more than a
few years
on this project and have a right to be a little paranoid about if our lives work might be
put in
to danger.
As for Steven... WINE, ROS, and any other
compatibility product out there is not 100% clean
room. It has never been, will never be, cannot be. Especially if we consider debug
information
as being "dirty". Reminds me of people freaking out when I added functions that
were in the IFS
-- you'd hope people would've grown up by now--.
Still it depends on the source of the information. We have discussed in private my views
on using
the debug information. I will publicly state I think the law is ambiguous at best and the
debug
information should be a valid source given Microsoft position of being a monopoly as found
by
Anti-trust proceedings. That being said a court might not agree with me so any behavior
must be 1.
Reproduceable or 2. Documented.
I could make a list of over 25 parts of ReactOS Which
are not 100% clean. But I won't, because
that would tarnish our image. I would appreciate if you'd stop tarnishing mine and
making
accusations.
I am not trying to trash your image. I am simply mentioning the truth that everyone
already knows
but could be deadly to this project and others in a kangaroo court in the US. When your
source of
information comes from documentation or a third part program exhibiting certain behavior
then
there is not a legal question as to if a reimplementation is a original work. If you are
basing
your implementation of a feature only on the debug information then clearly, at least in
my mind
it runs the danger being found a derived work and everytime you do so it at the very
least
tarnishes ReactOS's image.
Thanks
Steven
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/