File: XTree:\Forum archive |Bottom_of_page

| View Thread | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg |

XTree Forum archive

Re: XFP Updates and ZTree's XTree Heritage

Posted By: Greg Akers <>
Date: Mar-26-2001 7:27 a.m.

In Response To: Re: XFP Updates and ZTree's XTree Heritage (Mathias Winkler)

> Yep, I now added a link to it (and to two more reviews) at the XTFP "Links"-section:

I see. Thanks for those additions to your marvelous XTree compendium of information.

> Well, in fact, I think, this arrangement mainly ensures Zedtek to be able
> to distribute ZTreeWin as a commercial product, without having to reckon
> on a Symantec lawsuit ...

Yes, I think so, too. Any other XTree clones have such an arrangement?

> Hm, well, we have to pay attention not to mix up things:

OK. I can see that I may appear to have "assumed some facts not in evidence" in my previous message. I'm no lawyer, but I'll attempt to "plead the case" for my opinion (for what it's worth) on the topic of XTree "legal heritage" just for fun. ;-)

> Strictly speaking neither ZTree nor UnixTree is and will ever be a "legal
> XTree descendant", because firstly their authors respectively companies (Zedtek in the
> case of ZTree) do have nothing to do whatsoever with the former XTree Company
> (nor with Central Point or Symantec, of course).

Seems to me that because Zedtek does, in fact, have legal rights from Symantec (the current legal owner of XTree) to use the XTree 'look & feel' then that is, indeed, a form of "legal heritage" unique among XTree clones! Not that this is any major substantial issue, since I haven't heard of many, if any, successful lawsuits based solely on 'look & feel.' But I think it a very interesting footnote type item.

Of course, it's Kim Henkel's pioneering and dedicated hard work at extending the XTree 'look & feel' functionality into the 32-bit OS/2 and Windows environments that is the major substantial benefit to ZTree users and earns any de facto (as opposed to legal) XTree heritage honors such as, "The closest!! If any program should have the merit to be named 'XTreeGold 5.0', then this one !"

> Secondly, none of these program have derived a single line of code from the
> original XTree for DOS versions !!
> So they're both just clones, however, some damned good clones, I think !

But, if I understand it correctly - and I *don't* claim that I do - the same code that was born as 'XTree for UNIX' is now a part of UnixTree. I think that, by whatever legalities Rob Juergens retained or regained ownership of that code through the XTree-Central Point-Symantec succession, this too is another form of "legal heritage" from XTree.

Although neither 'XTree for UNIX,' XTreeWin, XTreeMac, nor certainly 'XTreeGold for Windows' shared any program code with the original XTree for DOS versions does not, in my non-expert opinion, negate their obvious XTree "legal heritage" of company association and legal name association. Just like distant cousins in a human family who share a legal family name but may actually share very little, if any, genetic code with a distinguished family ancestor does not negate their legal family heritage (although it may be superseded by closer relations in court).

That's the kind of XTree legal heritage I meant in my previous message. Not really any big deal like some legalities can be. Just another point of view that I find interesting to consider.

Messages in This Thread

| View Thread | Return to Index | Read Prev Msg | Read Next Msg |

XTree Forum archive is maintained by Mathias Winkler with WebBBS 3.21.

Xtree and XtreeGold are registered trademarks of Symantec Inc.
Other brands and products are trademarks of their respective holders.

FILE COMMANDS:  Directory_view Previous_file   Next_file cuRrent   /Help |Top_of_page