Assembler and Betov's last stand in ALA
From: hutch-- (hutch_at_movsd.com)
Date: 12/08/04
- Next message: Herbert Kleebauer: "Re: Get TWO free copies of MASM"
- Previous message: dunric_at_yahoo.com: "The move to 64-bit computing"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 8 Dec 2004 00:22:01 -0800
T.M.
An interesting view but with the assumption that the clause is
"boilerplate text" appears to try and limit obligation and liability
to a predefined theory not contained in the text.
The nature of the claims flying around in this newsgroup from
collectively Phil, Herbert, Betov and the Village Idiot have been
extensive and far reaching ones to the extent of claiming that
Microsoft have acted illegally in not conducting their business
according to the collective views of the people I have mentioned.
Now the distinction to draw here is between notions of reputation,
insult and/or abuse versus legal liability and the claim made by the
abovementioned people is one where Microsoft have acted illegally, not
that someone said they "suck" or "write lousy software" or whatever
else. Now the sense of acting illegally in the sense used implies
"subject to some form of penalty" even though this notion of penalty
has not been specified and does not make sense.
The notion that "reputation" or "allegations of conduct" don't matter
in terms of the licence does not take into account that Microsoft as a
very large organisation that has been involved from time to time in
massive scale legal battles where reputation and conduct has been used
as evidence against them so even if this was the only matter being
addressed by the abovementioned people, it is a sufficient reason to
act in their defence against the allegations.
Most would have some idea by now that the MASM32 project has been
downloaded for over 6 years and while I gave up keeping track of the
download count some time ago when it went past a million downloads, it
is fair to say that the total count of downloads is a very large
number so the allegations made against Microsoft of illegal actions
entails a very large count of illegal actions.
While I am not properly a user of the WIN98DDK versions of the
binaries in question as I own a boxed version for that version of ML,
as I maintain the MASM32 project and have gone through the process of
dealing with licencing divisions and copyright permission with
Microsoft with the result that Microsoft have validated the EULA in
the context in which I supply it under licence, I undertake the
obligation on behalf of that massive number of people who have
downloaded the project to defend Microsoft against the nonsense that
has been sprouted in here.
The context of bothering has a lot to do with the history of the
MASM32 project and from right at the beginning before it was released,
there was a lot of work and testing done by a collection of people who
had worked in Microsoft software for a long time. When it came to the
delivery of inforation, binaries, and permission to use their
software, it was Microsoft who delivered in an effective way that made
the project possible and put the best available tools in the hands of
ordinary programmers.
I cannot name many of the people for reasons of their non-disclosure
agreements and the like but it was Microsoft and people with a
Microsoft background that made the project possible, not the
alternatives that were being developed some years later who were
endlessly on the bite for include file data, specifications for APIs
and the like.
I support those who have supported the work I do to maintain the
MASM32 project and the massive number of people who have downloaded it
and use it, not the later hangers on, bludgers and takeover merchants
who want the control of other peoples work.
Regards,
hutch at movsd dot com
- Next message: Herbert Kleebauer: "Re: Get TWO free copies of MASM"
- Previous message: dunric_at_yahoo.com: "The move to 64-bit computing"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
