Re: The Status of CheckWorks

[nojunkhattonr@aug.com (Rick)]

Jeff Blakeney <CUTjefbla@bconnex.net> wrote:

> The version in question apparently was v3 which was commercial.
> 
> You also snipped the part of his message where the copyright holder
> said that he would like all the older shareware versions removed from
> all online services.  He doesn't want the shareware versions to made
> available anywhere anymore.
> 
> That is why the second paragraph you quoted came into the message.
> There is no "wiggle room" when you take the missing paragraph into
> account.

The wiggle room is the fact that there are two points of view in the
message.
-- 
Remove nojunk from my email address to reply by email.