rloew wrote:I never said you intended to hijack my work at any point, so why do you seem to be claiming the right to do so.
I'm telling you this because this what you say in such context perhaps can be interpreted in this way "Why don't you find an unsolved problem and come up with a solution."
And this is why i want to make this clear.
rloew wrote:Microsoft and maybe others can make modifications to these files possibly even for the same purpose, but they have to do so without knowledge of my solution. Copying my Patches, especially without even understanding what they do, is wrong.
As I said before, if people can legally copy my Patches without compensation to me, then I have absolutely no reason to make any of them available to others.
Is that what you want?
It is not about what i want. I have Linux and thousands of free sostware that come with it so i have everything what i want.
And i don't need anything of this.
It is about what others want and it is about of principe of how your patcher work. It put some fragments of data(or however you want to call that) - arrays of bytes
into MS files.
And why do you think that others do not have rights to do the same thing even with the same data cuz as i show earlier, this data - this arrays of bytes are common
to many programs.
So i do not see any other(different from patent) solution to protect this.
Your Ramdisk, your democore/multicore project these are your unique solutions nobody can say otherwise and you have copyright on it.
But puting "some bytes" into MS files is not unique and you can't say that only you can do this.
We've already seen it before in the older versions of KernelEx - it put "some bytes" into Kernel32.dll and other MS files.
And that is why i think the best solution is patent if you want to protect this.