I understand your point. I just disagree with you. Because I disagree doesn't mean I don't understand. Or that I am incapable of understanding. I agree to drop the discussion. We are just beating a dead horse. > On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 markring40 at ippimail.com wrote: > >>> No! The company has simply endured 998,000 violations of their license >>> agreement, something they can create and enforce based on copyright. >>> You may think that translates into the loss of $499M, and Mike may not. >>> While I think the company may be owed $499M by those who violated their >>> license, it is money they never had and in reality were never likely to >>> make. >> >> According to whom? I don't believe you've ever owned or managed a >> business. If someone uses a product you created and they have never >> paid for it; as the owner of that company you would most definately call >> that a loss. > > I think it's fair to say that you just don't understand our point. So I > think we should drop it because either you don't want to understand or you > are unable to understand. What we are talking about has nothing to do > with whether you have create software and it has nothing to do with laws. > It also has nothing to do with what a company will call a loss. If you > would read my earliest post with the 998,000 in it, maybe there is hope > that you will understand what I was saying, but I doubt it. > > Mike > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Get a free email address at http://www.ippimail.com and support your favorite charity without it costing you a penny. Now with 200mb storage and Google-powered search! Feelgood email!