+1
From: M100 Mike Stein
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 7:24 PM
To: m...@bitchin100.com
Subject: Re: [M100] "No-VAN" obligation
Ditto
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Adolph <mailto:twospru...@gmail.com>
To: m...@bitchin100.com <mailto:m...@bitchin100.com
Ditto
- Original Message -
From: Stephen Adolph
To: m...@bitchin100.com
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: [M100] "No-VAN" obligation
Thanks for providing that perspective Gary. Seems reasonable.
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:53 PM Gary We
Thanks for providing that perspective Gary. Seems reasonable.
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:53 PM Gary Weber wrote:
> To everyone with any concern about the M100SIG "NoVan" issue, I'm posting
> the following.
>
> After I was in direct communication with Wilson Van Alst back in the mid
> 2000s, I h
To everyone with any concern about the M100SIG "NoVan" issue, I'm posting
the following.
After I was in direct communication with Wilson Van Alst back in the mid
2000s, I had replaced my downloadable copy of the M100SIG archive on
Web8201 with the "NoVan" version that John graciously put together.
On 5/26/20 12:10 PM, Stephen Adolph wrote:
That is what I said, yes. I simply and politely asked if you (supposing
it was you that posted it) could do something about it.
So I will ask again, politely.
Can and will anything be done about it? As I have said, I think, if
possible, that the M1
That is what I said, yes. I simply and politely asked if you (supposing it
was you that posted it) could do something about it.
So I will ask again, politely.
Can and will anything be done about it? As I have said, I think, if
possible, that the M100SIG should be removed from the internet archi
So, the issue is that the stuff in question was commercial software?
IE, it was neither publicly posted by the author, nor stolen from his
hard drive, but was commercial software that was re-distributed illegally?
That is the detail that was missing or unclear to me.
--
bkw
On 5/26/20 11:02
