Chris We are singing from the same song sheet on this one; I agree 100%. The commandment is simple: "Verily I say onto you, thou shalt not use any code in your application, until thou has nigh on been assured that though knowest who the rightful owner of that code beath, unless thou wishest to be wailing and knashing your teeth in a court of law." Gordy

Paul Are you missing the point on purpose? This issue has absolutely nothing to do with CodeProject or CodeGuru. CP can't give people permission to use code posted on CP, for the simple reason that CP does not have any way to legally establish who owns the code posted here. It's just that simple. So if you use it in a commercial app you leave yourself open. Not to CP, but to some developer who might be able to legally establish their ownership of code you used without their permission. You are twisting things to make it look like a CP/CG "restriction." It really doesn't have anything to do with software either, for that matter. Let's say I collect 35 short story submissions from anonymous posters on a literature bulletin board. I'm not going to turn around and put them in a book, and publish it and sell it. Why? Because I have no idea whose work it really is. If I were a book publisher I would get legal protection in the form of warranties or assurances from the submitting author that they owned the copyright on the works they were submitting. Same issue applies here. It's not fair to portray it as a CodeProject or CodeGuru restriction, when it is just simply the way things work in **ALL** intellectual property matters. Gordy

Jim I'm not familiar with that library, so I can't comment on the particulars. But let's say it is entirely unwarranted code that HP puts in a commercial application. What happens if I file a complaint against HP that some of the code in this library is mine, and they're using it without my permission. Then I sue them. What is their defense? They can't go back to Stas; they have no enforeable contractual relationship with him at all. Why would any company leave themselves open to those kind of legal risks? I am sure that there is more to this HP/BCG library situation than meets the eye. If you buy a used car... and you're smart... you take the trouble to find out if the seller of the car really owns it. I can't believe that HP would do the equivalent of that with code... i.e. use it even if they had no idea who it really belonged to. Gordy

Paul Wescott IP issues are not neatly packaged. If I use a snippet from a magazine (or from CP) I'm not likely to run into IP ownership issues. But even then, I'm sure the magazine does address the ownership issue with the author. I highly doubt that DDJ would publish an article of my code, without an agreement whereby I warranted that it was in fact my own code. But notice I also referred to a "component." First, you don't see code for an entire component in a magazine. Second, we are free to use and resuse components that we buy and license from the code owner. Surely you're not suggesting that a professional developer would take code from an anonymous poster (like you find on CP and CG) and use it in a commercial application, without knowing whether the anonymous poster in fact owned the code they posted? I don't think so. I'd never dreaming of using a "free" component in an application unless someone had given me the legal protection I need through an explicit warranty of legal ownership. The risks would be too high! Gordy

Paul I can't explain any better than I already have. CP is a great site for looking at Code. In fact it a great place to for anything except getting code for free, that you then turn around and charge money for. If I take anyone's IP, and the edit it... if the editing is thorough enough there becomes a point where I have now created my own IP. Where that exact line is, in any given situation, is governed by the facts of the situation. I didn't say that **no** developers used unwarranted code in their commercial applications... I said that "professional developers" in "credible companies" didn't use unwarranted code in their application. Do you think Microsoft, HP, and IBM are trolling free posted code areas to include it in their applications? I highly doubt it. So the original point stands. Gordy

Paul CP is great to see how developers solve problems. Plus developers can find "free code" and modify it and fine tune and expand it. That's fine! But what you really shouldn't do is drop a complete CP component into your application. Why? Because someone else owns the code, but you don't really know who. If I buy a Dundas/Stingray component, they warrant that the code is their intellectual property, and that I can use it under their license agreement. Say Stingray sold a component that included code that belonged to someone else who could legally establish their ownership rights (highly unlikely it would ever happen). Say that person started legal action against me for using their intellectual property. I could go back to Stingray and claim damages based on the fact that they warranted that it was their intellectual property. What if the very same thing happened after using a component from CodeProject (instead of Stingray)? Well no one has given me a warranty about who the legal owner of the code is, so I'd be fully exposed. I'd be liable to damages (if they were legally established) in that situation. That's why it is a bad idea for a developer to use code in their application that doesn't come with a warranty establishing its legal ownership. As for Microsoft... well when you buy VC++/MFC they do warrant that they own the IP, and that you can use it under the terms of the license. But CP and CG, by definition, can not provide any warranties concerning ownership, so therefore, professional developers would be crazy to include these components in a commercial application. Gordy

Paul said: "That is right What is needed is to use these code snippets to build a lot of solution that developers can drop into their projects and bingo." Come on Paul, that doesn't make any sense. No credible organization is going allow code to go into their applications that comes from someone who doesn't warrant their ownership of the intellectual property. Anyone that is using "free" code from either CP or CG is exposing themselves to risks that just aren't worth it. And there is no way that Chris could provide any warranty on the ownership of the code, even if he wanted to. So I think this whole issue is Much Ado About Nothing. Professional developers don't use unwarranted "free" code in their applications... period! Gordy

I just can't understand the complaints that the "no name" contingent is making. It's like people complaining that they don't like the Crossword puzzle on the New York Times, and there should be higher quality news. The crossword puzzle doesn't come at the expense of the news; if people don't like the puzzle, just ignore it and read the news. There is no "one" reason why people visit this site; I imagine that people come for all kinds of different reasons. I think Chris has put together a fabulous site; my only complaint is that the message boards are too %$#$%#@ slow!! I think if they were faster that it would be much easier to have the kind of online discussions that would really benefit me as a developer. Right now it takes too long to page through the messages. If the "no name" complainers were a little more specific in their criticism, that might be one thing, but I think you should just ignore this general kind of whining. Gordy

There is a very interesting article in Red Herring abut how the sophistication of Israel's elite military operations is turning Israel into a tech powerhouse... http://www.redherring.com/mag/issue82/mag-education-82.html After reading the article I staretd to wonder why so few good tech companies come from people with high tech US military backgrounds. Gordy

Terry Microsoft IS a big fat-cat public company, so why shouldn't the CEO reflect that? No one is going to dominate the Internet the way that MSFT dominated the desk top, so no matter how well they do, it will look they are going down hill. Gord

Paul, EWBX (earthweb) is more or less a job site if you look where their revenue is coming from. I'm not too bullish on them. I kind of like RWAV (Roguewave). Their new CEO seems to know what he is doing. Their stock price is way down. And I have a feeling that their next quarter will be half decent. At $6... there doesn't seem like there is a whole lot of downside. I also like NMGC which is selling for less than the cash they have in the bank.