Alastair Houghton wrote:
How does that differ from what I wrote? (Answer: it doesn't)
It differs in the strength of the assertion: "is" is definitive; "may" isn't.
You essentially wrote "Technically that's copyright infringement ...", where "that's" is a contraction of "that is", and "is" is making a definitive assertion. We don't know whether it *is* copyright infringement or not, because we don't know the ownership of the sound, or even if it has any. Therefore, it *may* be copyright infringement, with or without the qualifying phrase "unless the owner of the aforementioned sound file (in this case Apple) says you can", which further assumes that Apple *is* the sound's copyright owner, and has not yet been proved.
I do agree that it isn't something we need debate at any length; I just thought that someone else might be able to locate the previous statement from Apple on the matter (since I don't recall where it was). I'm sure there was one, I just can't find it.
It wouldn't matter, unless the person was posting a legally binding statement, such as a license or permission statement, or a statement of corporate policy. Personally, I doubt that.
-- GG _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
