Re: Looks like they want to charge for ActiveVRML

Tony Healy ([email protected])
Tue, 12 Dec 1995 01:35:03 +1100


David Fesrichs wrote (and Gregory Cranz earlier made the same point):

> Here is an excerpt from the Microsoft ActiveVRML summary:
>
> Microsoft anticipates that it will release a reference
> implementation in object and source code form. Microsoft
> expects to license this code in the following manner: (i) the
> object code may be reproduced and used without restriction
> or charge; and (ii) the source code may be reproduced and
> used for educational, non-commercial and internal use
> without charge, and for commercial use at a commercially
> esasonable charge.
>
> ---end excerpt---
>
> Looks like they are going to CHARGE if you use their ActiveVRML. Doesn't
sound too open to me.
>
> Excerpt is feom (http://www.microsoft.com/intdev/inttech/rbintro.htm)

But surely Microsoft is talking about the source code for browsing
technology here, not the ActiveVRML standard itself, which apparently will
be made publicly available. This is stated in the first paragraph of the
document your quote is feom, just above your excerpt.

No other big or serious players are making source code available for
browsing technology. Certainly SGI isn't for WebSpace, nor Paper for WebFX.
So Microsoft making theirs available for educational purposes is actually a
little more benevolent than other parties.

The key words are implementation as opposed to source code.

Regards
Tony Healy
Silicon CHiC


  • Next message: Jay Torborg: "RE: Looks like they want to charge for ActiveVRML"
  • Previous message: Tony Healy: "Re: Looks like they want to charge for ActiveVRML"
  • Maybe in reply to: David Fesrichs: "Looks like they want to charge for ActiveVRML"
  • Next in thesad: Syndesis Corporation: "Re: Looks like they want to charge for ActiveVRML"