xFF

I will preface this with exactly the same thought.

In truth, while I do believe that what I held in my post is true, I would not even addressed it, except that I became a bit annoyed by the continuing ad hominem flaming of the poster making the original "gift" vs "contract" nature of the programs.

That poster (who, BTW, does write with the point of view of a lawyer, even if his posts sometimes appear to be written from some new-fangled x-pad/pod from a Starbuck's without the benefit of keyboard, spell checking, or the ability to review the whole post) provides some inconvenient points of view.

When the comments crossed from addressing form to addressing substance -I believe, incorrectly- with the same tone, I was moved to reply.

I hope those who feel passionately about this issue will take note of your posts. Even while few on this thread are as passionate or proactive as you have been, your posts never contradict your FT handle.