Digital Doctor Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #3 Fred Sherman said: Please tell me that was a joke. Click to expand... Hint: the poster was MJP ! who takes sarcasm to new levels
Fred Sherman said: Please tell me that was a joke. Click to expand... Hint: the poster was MJP ! who takes sarcasm to new levels
Kaiser Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #4 Digital Doctor said: Hint: the poster was MJP ! who takes sarcasm to new levels Click to expand... Exactly.
Digital Doctor said: Hint: the poster was MJP ! who takes sarcasm to new levels Click to expand... Exactly.
CroNiX Active member Jan 11, 2011 #5 Can we quote things from the lawsuit? There's some real gems in there.
Kier XenForo developer Staff member Jan 11, 2011 #6 Perhaps Kier and Mike think they have “refactored” enough of the code to skirt copyright law. Our analysis strongly indicates otherwise and we believe anyone skilled in understanding such things will concur. Click to expand... Like that howler?
Perhaps Kier and Mike think they have “refactored” enough of the code to skirt copyright law. Our analysis strongly indicates otherwise and we believe anyone skilled in understanding such things will concur. Click to expand... Like that howler?
J jmurrayhead Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #7 Kier said: Like that howler? Click to expand... Almost fell outta my chair, Kier!
AnthonyCea Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #8 Right O Kier, I got a good belly laugh out of that one too !! (You guys must be smarter than we already think you are to pull that off)
Right O Kier, I got a good belly laugh out of that one too !! (You guys must be smarter than we already think you are to pull that off)
Jethro Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #9 Kier said: Like that howler? Click to expand... I believe you might have used "?>" at the bottom of a script in clear violation of someone or other's copyright
Kier said: Like that howler? Click to expand... I believe you might have used "?>" at the bottom of a script in clear violation of someone or other's copyright
Kier XenForo developer Staff member Jan 11, 2011 #10 Jethro said: I believe you might have used "?>" at the bottom of a script in clear violation of someone or other's copyright Click to expand... Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script
Jethro said: I believe you might have used "?>" at the bottom of a script in clear violation of someone or other's copyright Click to expand... Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script
Kaiser Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #11 Jethro said: I believe you might have used "?>" at the bottom of a script in clear violation of someone or other's copyright Click to expand... Kier said: Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script Click to expand... LOL jethro... wow
Jethro said: I believe you might have used "?>" at the bottom of a script in clear violation of someone or other's copyright Click to expand... Kier said: Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script Click to expand... LOL jethro... wow
Peggy Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #12 Kier said: Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script Click to expand... aww but you can bet they will claim you do!
Kier said: Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script Click to expand... aww but you can bet they will claim you do!
Jethro Well-known member Jan 11, 2011 #13 Kier said: Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script Click to expand... But did you feel the need to do it ....
Kier said: Ironically, we don't terminate our PHP scripts - we never use ?> at the bottom of the script Click to expand... But did you feel the need to do it ....