> From: "Rich" 
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
> ------=_NextPart_000_014B_01C3F625.0502FA90
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> That is not the issue over which I'm taking you to task.  You have =
> repeatedly claimed that vendors like sun and not responsible for =
> providing fixes to software that include in their products if they do =
> not own the copyright. 

No I haven't. I have said that wrt linux distributions, the distributor
distributes the fixes written by the people whose software it is. 

> Are you now refuting this?  

I never said it ergo I have nothing to refute.

Does your employer =
> agree with your position?

Which position is that? That a linux distributor is responsible for
distributing fixes as & when it gets them from the people whose s/w it
is, but not writing them?

So if MS has to include competing products in the box with windows (e.g.
Real, Moz, WinAmp etc) MS is going to be responsible for not merely
distributing any fixes but actually writing them? 

I won't hold my breath. 

Does you employer agree that it should be responsible for writing any fixes
to these competing products? 

I'd be curious how MS plans to do this if Real etc won't release the source
code to MS (not to mention the possible copyright infringment implicit in
that course of action).



Adam


> Rich
> "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message =
> news:4033d294{at}w3.nls.net...
> Rich wrote:
>> So again you repeat you claims that a vendor such as sun is not=20
>> responsible for releasing fixes for software it releases in its =
> products=20
>> if it doesn't own the copyright for that software.  Does your =
> employer=20
>> agree with your position?
>> =20
> I have no problem with distributors packaging & distributing fixes.
>> =20
>> Adam
> ------=_NextPart_000_014B_01C3F625.0502FA90
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> 
>  charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> 
> 
> 
> 
>    That
is not the issue over =
> which I'm=20
> taking you to task.  You have repeatedly claimed that vendors like =
> sun and=20
> not responsible for providing fixes to software that include in their =
> products=20
> if they do not own the copyright.  Are you now refuting
this?  =
> Does=20
> your employer agree with your position?
>  
> Rich
>  
>  style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
> BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> "Adam Flinton" < =
>
href=3D"adam_NO_{at}_SPAM_softfab.com=">mailto:adam_NO_{at}_SPAM_softfab.com">adam_NO_{at}_SPAM_softfab.com=
> >=20
> wrote in message  =
>
href=3D"news:4033d294{at}w3.nls.net">news:4033d294{at}w3.nls.net...Ri=
> ch=20
> wrote:>    So again you
repeat you claims that a =
> vendor=20
> such as sun is not > responsible for releasing fixes for =
> software it=20
> releases in its products > if it doesn't own the
copyright for =
> that=20
> software.  Does your employer > agree with your=20
> position?>  I have no
problem with distributors =
> packaging=20
> & distributing fixes.>
>     =
> Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5