7 Feb
2013
7 Feb
'13
5:54 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Simon Wise <simonzwise(a)gmail.com> wrote:
so the problem then was originally an unintended side effect of a
different policy. Then it was brought to their attention, at that time they
considered it seriously enough to consult their lawyers and make a serious
response.
They actively decided not to change their policy and continued to refuse
to license FLOSS distribution of binaries for the next 10 years.
So a decade later it is no longer an oversight or mistake, it is now an
active "we don't care".
steinberg has been sold twice during that interval. you might feel that
FLOSS issues are important. i can assure you that anyone who ever felt
remotely that way at steinberg in 2001 is either no longer at the company
or is so irrelevant to what its current owners do that it makes no
difference.