Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!pitt!willett!ForthNet
From: ForthNet@willett.pgh.pa.us (ForthNet articles from GEnie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: What's WRONG with Forth?
Message-ID: <2818.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 27 May 91 18:55:30 GMT
Organization: (n.) to be organized.  But that's not important right now.
Lines: 26

Category 2,  Topic 9
Message 104       Sat May 25, 1991
B.RODRIGUEZ2 [Brad]          at 13:22 EDT
 
Yes, CREATE and colon can be reinvented.  (Certainly I've had to write a few
versions of each.)  But the problem is, can Forth Inc. claim that "my" CREATE
and colon are in fact derived from theirs?

This is particularly nasty because I would have Forth Inc.'s source code for
CREATE and colon, just not the rights to use them (without royalty, that is). 
A strong case could probably be made, since I have this source code and can't
help but see it and use it, that I have been "influenced" by it .... i.e.,
that I couldn't help borrowing bits of it for my own CREATE and colon.  It's
arguments like this that bring money into Lotus and Apple.

Now, I'm not saying that Forth Inc. is particularly litigious.  But there's
just enough legal ambiguity in the situation to make me uncomfortable,
especially when I must legally deliver clear title to the software I'm
producing.

- Brad
-----
This message came from GEnie via willett.  You *cannot* reply to the author
using e-mail.  Please post a follow-up article, or use any instructions
the author may have included (USMail addresses, telephone #, etc.).
Report problems to: dwp@willett.pgh.pa.us _or_ uunet!willett!dwp