From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Apr 28 18:10: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from lariat.lariat.org (lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71E5B37BA24; Fri, 28 Apr 2000 18:09:57 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA11007; Fri, 28 Apr 2000 19:09:51 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <4.3.1.2.20000428190858.00b6b500@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 19:09:39 -0600 To: Kris Kennaway From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: M$ anti-trust case Cc: Terry Lambert , "G. Adam Stanislav" , chat@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.1.2.20000426171753.044954b0@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 03:21 PM 4/28/2000, Kris Kennaway wrote: >On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Brett Glass wrote: > > > Actually, the original point I made was that Symantec wantonly > > copied Steve's surface analysis algorithms -- they literally > > took the assembly code verbatim! -- and then licensed the > > code to Microsoft. So, Steve's work is in a Microsoft product > > and he's gotten no payment for it. > >So he should have GPLed the code so it couldn't be ripped off by those >corporate fascists? :-) Yeah, right. Actually, if he'd GPLed it he would first have had to prove that the GPL was valid and enforceable. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message