[osflash] redistributing MM classes with MTASC fixes

[Peter Hall]

Examining these EULAs is probably won't get anywhere. Macromedia simplified them a lot, but they are still designed to be 
prohibitive, beyond what is really necessary. This is to make sure that legal action can be taken, in an extreme case, and to 
prevent people escaping through loop-holes.

You should talk to someone at Macromedia directly, who can tell you yes or no, based on exactly what you want to do with the code. 
If the EULA says no, there is still room for them to say yes... Mike Chambers should be a good start. He can at least put you in 
touch with the right person.

Peter

www.peterjoel.com
www.macromedia.com/go/team/


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JesterXL" <jesterxl at jessewarden.com>
To: "Open Source Flash Mailing List" <osflash at osflash.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 3:28 AM
Subject: Re: [osflash] redistributing MM classes with MTASC fixes


> This has been discussed 10 billion times; the only reason it wasn't resolved
> is because anyone who ever resolved a thread that popped up wasn't a
> certified laywer that could answer the questions that arose after said post.
>
> Since I'd prefer to keep the world turning, and thus repeat history, *ahem*:
>
> http://www.macromedia.com/software/eula/tools/flash_components.html
>
> That should answer all questions (it hasn't in the past, but repeating just
> because I'm good at repitition, too much techno...)
>
> Here is the full license:
> http://www.macromedia.com/software/eula/tools/supplemental_license.html
>
> If you are looking for the Material Improvement definition, it's at the
> bottom:
>>>>
> "Material Improvement" shall be defined as perceptible, measurable and
> definable improvements to the Components Framework or a Component that
> provide extended or additional functionality that add significant business
> value to the components.
> <<<