Brad,

Its not the packets I am worrying about, it is divulging what is in
the packets.  I have some legal people at Google looking at some of
the areas I found since they seem to be pursuing anti-trust against
MS.  I figure Google the lessor of 2 evils and they are looking at
ways to get at Microsoft so why not add some ammo for Google.

George

On 7/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If one were merely capturing the packets that Vista was sending to M$,
> surely that wouldn't qualify as reverse engineering or circumventing DRM.
>  Comments?
>
> Brad
>
>
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 21:48:23 -0700 "member greenarrow1"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Only if we bench test but not talk about.  This is what the problem
> > is
> > as you stated because if one tears apart anything you are violating
> > the EULA and license.  The EULA back talks itself in areas allowing
> > you in one statement then denying you in another.  One area of
> > concern
> > is WGA as it requests to change and modify the physical memory thus
> > creating a back door avenue for root kits.  MS told me they fixed
> > this
> > months ago but I found it back again with the last WGA update so
> > whom
> > are they trying to fool.
> >
> > Besides Google has now been in contact with me about the info I
> > have.
> > As much as I do not really like Google privacy and rules at least
> > this
> > is a avenue for me for financial and lawyer support against Vista
> > and
> > MS.  If Vista and MS do not violate anti-trust in certain software
> > and
> > software areas then we all might as well forget everything because
> > they have the higher ups in their pockets.  Plus regardless of what
> > the EULA and license states and the user agrees does not mean the
> > EULA
> > does not violate federal or state privacy laws.  The EULA leaves
> > that
> > open as to what MS can do with private info in the future and needs
> > court clarification.  I want to know what law gives them the right
> > to
> > collect this data in the first place.  Preventing piracy is not a
> > legal reason nor do I feel it would stand up in court.   MS is a
> > big
> > backer of DRM and one of the reasons is their wanting control of
> > what
> > you do, the internet, and everything that you have on your
> > computer.
> > They want the user to be totally dependent on Microsoft.
> >
> > George
> >
> > On 7/3/07, Mario Torre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Il giorno lun, 02/07/2007 alle 22.42 -0700, member greenarrow1 ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > Maybe a little of both.  If I told MS that portions of their
> > software
> > > > violate privacy laws they will come back and ask me how I derived
> > this
> > > > info.
> > >
> > > On a side note, we are currently violating the EULA ;), which
> > forbids
> > > users to reveal portion of itself...
> > >
> > > Mario
> > > --
> > > Lima Software - http://www.limasoftware.net/
> > > GNU Classpath Developer - http://www.classpath.org/
> > > Fedora Ambassador - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MarioTorre
> > > Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF
> > > Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA  FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF
> > >
> > > Please, support open standards:
> > > http://opendocumentfellowship.org/petition/
> > > http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Advocate mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > greenarrow1
> > InNetInvestigations-Forensic
> > SuSe 10.2/TriStar/Apache
> > GoBoLinux
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Advocate mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Advocate mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate
>


-- 
greenarrow1
InNetInvestigations-Forensic
SuSe 10.2/TriStar/Apache
GoBoLinux

_______________________________________________
Advocate mailing list
[email protected]
http://badvista.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/advocate

Reply via email to