10 Mar
2005
10 Mar
'05
7:21 p.m.
On Thursday 10 March 2005 04:51 pm, Lee Revell wrote:
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 15:50 -0500, John Check wrote:
I don't think this is a problem. Creative has never come after anyone
for making and distributing their own soundfonts. They seem to have
taken a hands-off attitude towards open source.
Right, but it still represents a potential stumbling block in the future WRT
redistributing their rendition of the spec..
I'm thinking back to TrollTech and QT.. Anyway, the issue at hand isn't
SoundFonts or the spec but circulating the original document.
The "Doh!" was regarding the 2 seconds it took for me to answer my own
question.
One could
also make the interpretation that circulating it within the
development community constitutes "internal".
However, Mark's original email didn't supply sufficient background
WRT to the standards origin. Is there sufficient legal structure behind
it? IOW is it from a corporate structure with resources to make
trouble?
In the tradition of replying to my own questions:
whois soundfont.comRegistrant:
CREATIVE LABS, INC. (SOUNDFONT-DOM)
1901 MCCARTHY BLVD
MILPITAS, CA 95035-7427
US
Domain Name: SOUNDFONT.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact:
Marketing, Internet (YTEYTUZMFI)
domainregadmin(a)creativelabs.com
Creative Labs, Inc.
1901 McCarthy Blvd
Milpitas, CA 95035-7427
US
408-428-6600
DOH! Lee