Mosaic is still owned by NCSA
Jonathan L Neuenschwander (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thu, 13 Apr 1995 22:45:03 +0500
> On Wed, 12 Apr 1995, Joerg Rhiemeier wrote:
> > Thomas Mohr <email@example.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > Actually, the situation has become MUCH worse than that: Spyglass have sold
> > the code to MICRO$OFT. Guess what they'll do about NCSA Mosaic as soon as
> > they have MS Mosaic out! Currently, NCSA shells out betas for evaluation
> > purposes (as Netscape does), but I assume that MS will stomp that out VERY
> > quickly.
> > The last free version of NCSA Mosaic was 2.4, which was released before
> > they sold their code to Spyglass. There are some improved versions coming
> > from places like Tuebingen University which are based on NCSA Mosaic 2.4,
> > but I fear Micro$oft's law department will find a way to illegalize these
> > versions as well.
> What about Xmosaic 2.5? And the 2.6 beta? I can't even find a license
> for them.
> Did UIUC actually sell the code to Spyglass or just put them in charge
> of commercial apps? And aren't there other licensed commercial
NCSA still owns Mosaic, however they didn't really wish to deal with handling
all the liscensing so they sold those rights to Spyglass. So now Spyglass
handles all liscensees, including Microsoft. MICROSOFT DOES NOT OWN MOSAIC.
They're *just* a liscensee. Spyglass does not own Mosaic. They just
purchased the rights to handle the liscensing.
The nice part about all this is that NCSA gets to pick and choose among
liscensees' enhancements any features they wish to add to a future version of
Mosaic! So the talent pool is that much wider.
firstname.lastname@example.org _/ _/ _/ _/ And it would of worked
QUESTION AUTHORITY -- _/ _/ _/_/ _/ if it hadn't been for
And the authorities _/ _/ _/ _/_/ those meddling kids and
will question you. _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ their stupid dog