I have less pangs with such things provided they innovate and try to further the technology. the ability to send information/choices to a client, then back into modo, is an innovation, and it is early days yet.
The worst are Joe Alter style scenarios when one paten holds back innovation. I still feel its a lot more criminal to buy a product with intent to terminate. On 15 July 2014 17:44, Stefan Kubicek <s...@tidbit-images.com> wrote: > Lesson learned: Even have your grandmother sign a f**ing NDA before > telling her anything. > > > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Marc-Andre Carbonneau < > marc-andre.carbonn...@ubisoft.com> wrote: > >> Wow… couldn’t they have protected themselves better? >> >> Why didn’t TF offer to buy them or the product and make it part of their >> product offering? >> > > That's only a cost/benefit question for most businesses. The likely answer > is that once the legal team decided that there was no significant legal > obstacle to replicating the functionality, and the dev team estimated the > effort to do so, the total cost was lower to do it internally than to buy > Motiva or their IP (which might not have been for sale anyway). > > Maybe not the most ethically pure thing to do, but not on the face of it > "improper." > > Often sucks to be the little guy. They have my sympathy. > > > > > > > -- > > ----------------------------------------------------- > Stefan Kubicek ste...@keyvis.at > <%22ste...@keyvis.at%22+%3cste...@keyvis.at%3E> > ----------------------------------------------------- > Alfred Feierfeilstraße 3 > A-2380 Perchtoldsdorf bei Wien > Phone: +43 (0) 699 12614231 > www.keyvis.at > This email and its attachments are > confidential and for the recipient only >
