From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a875d9649dde34e3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!newsfeed.mathworks.com!nntp.abs.net!ash.uu.net!spool.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 17:40:20 -0400
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: GWindows and a future home for it
References: <mailman.211.1097058780.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
	<2004100609152216807%david@bottoncom>
	<mailman.213.1097073355.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
	<1097075228.200924@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
	<mailman.216.1097082275.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
	<ck1f9g$bin$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
	<mailman.223.1097090416.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
	<1097094602.726795@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <mailman.225.1097098114.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
In-Reply-To: <mailman.225.1097098114.390.comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1097098820.788674@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@nightcrawler.nyc.kbcfp.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.1 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10
X-Trace: 1097098820  2671 204.253.250.10
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4844
Date: 2004-10-06T17:40:20-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Marius Amado Alves wrote:
> In that case I see no problem, because proprietary software does not 
> seem to be suffering from this :-)

Proprietary software doesn't have the additional complication of
allowing intermediate non-commercial use. And I doubt that most
commercial software incorporates many small separately licensed
components.

> Thanks for your time and knowledge. I'll take a look at the Id Sender 
> business.

Microsoft claims to have applied for patents on the SenderID
technology. They were offering to license these royalty-free,
but each vendor/implementor was required to individually get
such a license from Microsoft. Naturally, this is a problem
for open source, where the distinctions between implementor,
vendor, and user may be non-existent. The proposal was not
accepted as an IETF standard.