Re: A response to Phil Carmody.
From: hutch-- (hutch_at_movsd.com)
Date: 11/24/04
- Next message: Percival: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Previous message: Percival: "Re: A letter from the Mickey Mouse Club (ALA) to Microsoft"
- In reply to: Herbert Kleebauer: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Next in thread: Percival: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Reply: Percival: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 24 Nov 2004 13:34:49 -0800
Herbert,
3 things, do you really want to reopen the can of worms with Betov's
licencing of asm32. The asm32 licence is contained in the original
download and it clearly did not justify what Betov did with it.
Getting consent 4 year after he used the software illegally does not
solve the problem for either him or for your interpretation. Betov
STOLE the software and wrote software that he released without ever
paying for it or registering it.
In light of the original licence published with asm32, what is the
value of your EXTENSIVE legal opinion ?
> There also was some doubt whether your distribution of MASM is legal.
> Therefore also the author of MASM (Microsoft) was contacted to clarify
> the situation. The statement from Microsoft USA is, that it is illegal
> to distribute MASM and the statement from Microsoft Germany is, that
> it is also illegal to download and use MASM from the links given
> at www.masm32.com:
Why is it Herbert that you have had so much trouble convincing
Microsoft about your view on the MASM32 project ? Is it that you don't
know enough about the licence that it uses or is it because even with
your misrepresentation of the licence you are simply wrong. I will put
it to you that you were wrong to start with and you comments to
Microsoft as far as you have published them misrepresent the situation
set out in the EULA and the MASM32 project. I will put it to you that
it is this failure that has made your self appointed crusade again
Microsoft futile.
> Now we have the situation, that Microsoft says, it is illegal to
> download MASM, but on the other side, Microsoft tolerates the download
> sites. This illogical. I try to force Microsoft to resolve this
> contradiction. Either they official allow the download, or they close
> the download sites.
Can you see the absurdity of what you are trying to do, you have
failed to force Microsoft to accept your EXTENSIVE legal opinion so
you claim you are reporting them for allowing software piracy of their
own software. This is pathetic nonsense from someone who cannot accept
that they were wrong to start with and was naive enough to stick their
neck out and make a fool of themselves.
Do you seriously think that Microsoft need your help in tracking down
illegal software when the WIN98DDK was supplied from their own site in
1998 on their advice from MSDN by email and the MASM32 project has
used some of its binaries under licence ever since. Do you imagine
that for one moment that Microsoft have problems contacting me when
they have my home phone number and local address ?
Then there is this naive arrogance of thinking you are going to force
Microsoft into doing anything when they already well know about the
MASM32 project at a level that you will never get to. :)
> I have never seen a posting of you with an statement from
> Microsoft that it is legal to distribute MASM. If you have such
> a statement, please repost it so I can confront Microsoft
> with the two contradicting statements.
I don't intend to do anything else except help you make a bigger fool
of yourself. With your one man crusade to dictate to Microsoft how
they distribute and licence their software, this will not be a
dificult task. The problem is that you never will see what you don't
want to see, after trying to dictate you opinion over Microsoft in
relation to how they should run their business according to your
EXTENSIVE legal opinion, do you seriously think that you are in some
sense privy to negotiations that you have no part of when you claim
you are reporting them to another agency for supporting software
piracy of their own product.
If you cannot see how pathetic this is you are in trouble.
Now if you REALLY and TRULY want to open the can of worms about
Betov's use of the asm32 software ILLEGALLY, just say so and I will
show you how to grind a licence written in English to dust. The ball
is in your court if you REALLY need the practice. I let it go because
it simply does not matter and it was boring to members of this
newsgroup but if you want to inflict your EXTENSIVE knowledge of
contracts and software licencing on this newsgroup, feel free to do
so. :) Something you have yet to learn is that contract and licence
issues are not determined by consensus in a newsgroup.
It seems that you are taking legal lessons from Betov so I guess its
only a matter of time until you come up with Betov's "legally stolen"
and other similar nonsense. At least this is consistent with the
nonsense that is coming out of you at the moment reporting Microsoft
for allowing software piracy of their own copyright software.
Its clear that like Betov, you are jealous of the sheer brutal power
of MASM and want to try and discourage programmers from using it so
they will have to listen to the nonsense that regularly gets pelted
around this newsgroup.
Regards,
hutch at movsd dot com
- Next message: Percival: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Previous message: Percival: "Re: A letter from the Mickey Mouse Club (ALA) to Microsoft"
- In reply to: Herbert Kleebauer: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Next in thread: Percival: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Reply: Percival: "Re: A response to Phil Carmody."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
