Rev licensing

[Richard Gaskin]

Alain Farmer wrote:
> Hello Richard,
> 
>> Today All RunRev requires is
>> (last I heard anyway):
>>    This product was made with Revolution
>>    Portions Copyright 2006 Runtime Revolution Ltd.
> 
> I don't object to including of a copyright notice in
> *MY* splash-screen, and definitely in the About and
> other docs, but the issue is whether we have to use
> Rev's splash instead of our own CUSTOM splash screen.

When did anyone ever say that?

I hear the sound of straws being grasped so as to drag this thread out 
longer than would be truly required....

>> I see nothing "natural" about choosing a tool
>> and then being ashamed of your own choice.
> 
> MetaCard and Rev are a hard sale.

You're not a reseller, and no one's asking you to become one.

A simple copyright notice doesn't seem all that cumbersome; hardly 
merits this much fuss.

> What *I* like, versus what my customers *expect*, are
> TWO different matters. 

If you have customers who care that much about the underlying technology 
to have specific complaints about a given tool, the choice seems simple: 
  find a tool to satisfy such a finicky audience, or find a less finicky 
audience.

My customers don't seem to care what tool I use, they just like what I 
deliver with it.

>> A vendor has a legitimate right to request
>> a simple copyright notice in exchange for 
>> accomplishing the other 90% of your application.
> 
> This isn't what is objectionable [toi me]. I'm okay
> with including a copyright notice in the About, and
> other docs too; perhaps even in *my* splash screens,
> albeit in very small print.
> 
> The issue is whether we can create our own custom
> standalone 'players', with our own custom splash
> screen, for the editable stacks that we craft for our
> customers.

Kevin clarified this, and Ken recapped it.  That was this morning.  It's 
now well into the evening.  Did you miss this morning's mail?

In short, there would appear no problem with what you describe.  The 
archives from this morning carry the details.


>>> Sorry for giving you such a hard time
>>> about this, Kevin,
>> metacard at lists.runrev.com is not Kevin's address.
>> Kevin's address is kevin at runrev.com
> 
> Thanks for the info. I was assuming that Kevin was on
> THIS list, as well as any other [mail] list that deals

I'm sure he reads this list when he gets to it.  But so do many others, 
and none of those others can help you.

If you're merely looking for an audience for your latest reiteration of 
why you dislike Rev's licensing I suppose you've found a captive 
audience here.

But if you're looking for results you have Kevin's address by which to 
seek them.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Managing Editor, revJournal
  _______________________________________________________
  Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com