Tim O'Reilly writes:
 > Russell Nelson wrote:
 > >   o In the software world, anyone can write a replacement for anyone
 > >     else's program, or library, or can change that program on the fly.
 > >     Nobody is fined or failed for this.
 > 
 > This is not true, and was the point of the article.

Well, there's three possible responses to this:

  o If you tow something using a car which is not suited for towing,
    and you break something, you just toasted your warranty.
    Different products are designed for different purposes.

  o Um, sorry, no, anyone *can* write a replacement for IIS running on 
    NT Server without being fined or jailed.  Just because the
    economics don't work out, that doesn't mean it's prohibited by
    law.  Nor does it mean that any laws need to be changed.

  o Has anyone been fined or jailed for violating a shrink-wrap
    license?  The precedents are mixed -- in some jurisdictions
    you can laugh at shrink-wrap restrictions.  In others they are law,
    at least until they're overturned anyway.  See
    http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html .

 > Nonetheless, because of the strong allergic reactions from people who I
 > respect, I'm thinking we should put up some of these responses to the
 > article, if you guys are willing.

Let's have you finish criticizing them.

-- 
-russ nelson <sig@russnelson.com>  http://russnelson.com
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | Government schools are so
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | bad that any rank amateur
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | can outdo them. Homeschool!