JTK wrote: > > Netscape should, if we read the license, > *IF*. You should do this, as I demonstrate below. > So where's the code for that sweet AIM program? Yeah. AIM is not part of the browser, thus would not be required to have available source code, even if NS were required to release their branded code. You can read this for yourself in the sections I outline in a reply to Gervase. -- jesus X [ Booze-fueled paragon of pointless cruelty and wanton sadism. ] email [ jesusx @ who.net ] web [ http://burntelectrons.com ] [ Updated April 29, 2001 ] tag [ The Universe: It's everywhere you want to be. ] warning [ All your base are belong to us. ]
- Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1 PR1 with Mozilla 0.9... Edwin Overmeer
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1 PR1 with Mo... ZZT
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1 PR1 wit... Jay Garcia
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1 PR1... ZZT
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1... Christopher Jahn
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1... Jay Garcia
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscap... Gervase Markham
- Re: Is it better to replace Net... JTK
- Re: Is it better to replace... DeMoN_LaG
- Re: Is it better to replace... jesus X
- Re: Is it better to replace... Gervase Markham
- Re: Is it better to replace... JTK
- Re: Is it better to replace... W.
- Re: Is it better to replace... jesus X
- Re: Is it better to replace Net... Ian Hickson
- Re: Is it better to replace Net... jesus X
- Re: Is it better to replace... Gervase Markham
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1 PR1 wit... Henri Sivonen
- Re: Is it better to replace Netscape 6.1 PR1 with Mo... Bren..