spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Microsoft released more info Aug 30, 2004

2004-09-01 20:05:57
"David Brodbeck" <gull(_at_)gull(_dot_)us> writes:

On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:41:22 -0700, Jonathan Gardner wrote
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 01 September 2004 02:06 pm, jpinkerton wrote:

I believe you can now think of spf as being MS property unless you're
prepared to fight them :-(


Yes, we made a deal with the devil.

When Meng originally signed things over to Microsoft, a lot of people said 
that.  At the time, I thought they were overreacting.  Now I see they were 
right all along.

If so, this is very sad.

It's nice to be hopeful and trusting; but one needs to be prudent, as
well.  The doomsayers (or at least some of us) have been basing our
concerns on Microsoft's multi-decade track record of behaving in exactly
this manner.

I'm sure that there are a lot of nice, decent, well-intentioned people
working for Microsoft, some of whom no doubt took part in the
discussions.  But these are not the policymakers.

And no matter what these friendly folks might have _said_, what the
Microsoft lawyers have in writing is what will ultimately matter.

[sigh]


-- 
 Lloyd Zusman
 ljz(_at_)asfast(_dot_)com
 God bless you.