I saw another somewhat similar thread, though that user said he would be distributing it on a large scale it seems, what is it that differs between his and my request?
The other poster's request is no more valid than yours.. but that doesn't mean either one is valid at all. Both of these discussions should be held in private with Khaled though, not publically on the forum, so I suggest emailing him, as Khaled asked the last poster to do.
As a sidenote though, I imagine Khaled doesn't just grant anyone permission to redistribute the binary *just because they asked*-- if that were the case, then everybody would just bombard him with emails which wouldn't give him much time to analyze the scenario. In addition, from what I understood, the poster you're referring to was making a rather legitimate business request and was prepared to offer monetary compensation (I hope, for the poster's sake) complimenting the fact that the redistribution plan had a well defined end goal / target user and would not last indefinitely. This is as opposed to your request which seems to be asking for the privilege to redistribute the binary *indefinitely* with no defined target user or reason. Well, you do have a reason, but the reason is not really unique enough reason to deserve the privilege to redistribute the binary over every other script in the world, imho.
If you want to be taken seriously, I would email Khaled directly with a specific/unique reason for your request in addition to some kind of definite time when redistribution will end. I would hope Khaled would never allow indefinite redistribution of his software as part of any other software package.
Remember that whenever Khaled allows his software to be bundled with other software, he's taking a risk that the value of his own Intellectual Property remains intact, not only physically, but through things like
Trademark Dilution for instance, among other types of IP dilution. Risk usually implies compensation, monetary or otherwise. He also has to make sure that his software will not be resold, etc. or that the software it's bundled with would make clear distinction between mIRC and any other components if they were to be sold alongside mIRC in the package. I'm no lawyer, but these are but a few things that he would have to watch out for. It's really for this reason that he can't just allow any request to be granted-- moreso than the reasons about integrity of the files, etc. I remember not so long ago when Khaled locked the name of the executable to always be "mirc*.exe" because people were renaming the binary and redistributing it under the veil that it was their work. This is exactly the kind of IP theft/trademark dilution that Khaled has to protect against.
PS. Not all of the above text applies to your specific case. I just thought I'd give a brief overview of the implications of redistributing the binary, given all the attention the topic has been getting recently.
