on 8/1/02 12:44 AM, Steven at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really don't mind off-topic disussions,
Really, please let us know just, in your opinion, what exactly is on
topic, so that we don't ever again err.
--
All the best,
R.A. Cantrell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Vintage Macs is sponsored
on 8/1/02 12:47 AM, b e n w e l l s | headwerkx at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It happened here in Australia a few years ago; a charity organisation who
reconditioned old junk PCs to give to children and schools who couldn't
afford new year, and in turn gave job training to those were doing
piracy.. the journalist pleaded but this a charity, and it's old software
... it's software piracy said the MS woman, like a robot.
Ben.
- Original Message -
From: R.A. Cantrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Vintage Macs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: OS
This story just doesn't ring true. Microsoft make their newest software
available cheap for schools ( As a student I bought new, licensed, XP and
Office for $6 each)
True but one of the things the US DOJ brought up was that when a new
version comes out they increase the price of the old one
--- the pickle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 14:13 -0500 on 31/07/02, R.A. Cantrell wrote:
Thanks for the response. To push the abstraction a
bit further, let's say
we're talking OS 8.1 and that it is on a computer
bought and dragged in
from a garage sale? How about on a stack of HD's
--- william ahearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
clip
As with the music business (who, let's face it
deserve to be ripped deep -- if it could only be
done without hurting all of the artists),
Without hurting the artists? Ha. Just ask the
artists that haven't been cowed into spouting the
music
--- Aedan McGhie/Scotland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... it's software piracy said the MS woman, like
a robot.
And there was something on MS web page about that
recently. They
warned charities about doing that kind of thing.
What's _really_ perverse is all the ads Microsoft has
put out
Gregg Eshelman wrote:
--- william ahearn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
clip
As with the music business (who, let's face it
deserve to be ripped deep -- if it could only be
done without hurting all of the artists),
Without hurting the artists? Ha. Just ask the
artists that haven't
At 04:39 AM 08/01/2002 -0500, you wrote:
This story just doesn't ring true. Microsoft make their newest software
available cheap for schools ( As a student I bought new, licensed, XP and
Office for $6 each)
--
In Oregon, MS was trying to insist that any donated PCs had to be kept with
the
At 09:57 +0100 on 01/08/02, Mark Benson wrote:
$80 for 8.6) but they are still selling it retail. Therefore those
companies are missing out on custom from people if they use a copied
Yeah, but they don't have any claim to the loss because they aren't the
copyright holder. That'd be like Apple
At 04:39 -0500 on 01/08/02, R.A. Cantrell wrote:
on 8/1/02 12:47 AM, b e n w e l l s | headwerkx at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It happened here in Australia a few years ago; a charity organisation who
reconditioned old junk PCs to give to children and schools who couldn't
afford new year,
What are you supposed to do if you get a nasty virus or a power
surge blasts your box or it gets stolen or cooked in a fire or
otherwise trashed so the software onboard is permanently kaput?
On vintage Macs, it's called backing-up your hard drive.
--
Vintage Macs is sponsored by
on 8/1/02 10:07 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While I feel he understands
my concerns, I also feel
Try taking feel out of the equation.
--
All the best,
R.A. Cantrell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Vintage Macs is sponsored by http://lowendmac.com/ and...
Small Dog Electronics
I'm starting this on the Vintage Macs because it might be the case that many
vintage Mac users/owners find themselves using upgraded software re
Operating Systems.
We've had several strings that have discussed the do's and don'ts, right and
wrongs about using software with . . .or without owning
R.A. Cantrell wrote:
I'm not really interested in hearing a bunch of practical advice in the
matter, but in discussing the abstract principles involved.
First off, if it's an Apple system prior to OS 7.6.1
and not including SSW 7.1 (althought that restriction
may have been lifted),
on 7/31/02 2:00 PM, william ahearn at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First off, if it's an Apple system prior to OS 7.6.1
and not including SSW 7.1 (althought that restriction
may have been lifted), you can put the software on your
dog and your toaster and all your Macs without
infringing
At 14:13 -0500 on 31/07/02, R.A. Cantrell wrote:
Thanks for the response. To push the abstraction a bit further, let's say
we're talking OS 8.1 and that it is on a computer bought and dragged in
from a garage sale? How about on a stack of HD's pulled from computers
bought at a garage
on 7/31/02 2:19 PM, the pickle at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Technically, a seller is *supposed* to transfer the licence with the computer,
or if they don't wish to transfer the licence, wipe the computer clean. So in
theory, at least, it's not *your* problem.
That leaves open the possibility
R.A. Cantrell wrote:
Thanks for the response. To push the abstraction a bit further, let's say
we're talking OS 8.1 and that it is on a computer bought and dragged in
from a garage sale?
In real terms, I don't give it a second thought. I wipe
every acquired drive anyway -- after
on 7/31/02 2:39 PM, william ahearn at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the NYC police can be convinced
by some copyright holder to raid my apartment and take
down serial numbers from the software on an SE/30 or a
6100, then we're really in trouble.
William
You're going in the direction of the
R.A. Cantrell wrote:
You're going in the direction of the practical and away from the abstract,
but, in those practical terms, I think it's going to get darker outside
before it gets lighter, if you know what I mean.
Then, let me put it this way: Does the use of the
software deprive
on 7/31/02 3:02 PM, william ahearn at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then, let me put it this way: Does the use of the
software deprive anyone of anything?
Yes, potential licensing fees. Moolah.
--
All the best,
R.A. Cantrell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Vintage Macs is sponsored by
R.A. Cantrell wrote:
Then, let me put it this way: Does the use of the
software deprive anyone of anything?
Yes, potential licensing fees. Moolah.
--
In the case of currently available software I agree
with you. But what about software that hasn't had an
update in years, offers no
At 15:05 -0500 on 31/07/02, R.A. Cantrell wrote:
on 7/31/02 3:02 PM, william ahearn at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then, let me put it this way: Does the use of the
software deprive anyone of anything?
Yes, potential licensing fees. Moolah.
It's pretty difficult to make that argument when the
on 7/31/02 3:10 PM, william ahearn at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the case of currently available software I agree
with you.
I'm trying to direct the conversation toward this category in order to
confine the discussion to the abstract consideration of ownership rights,
not the practical
At 16:36 -0400 on 31/07/02, Eagle wrote:
even. But just because it cannot be bought anywhere today, and just
because no company in existence cares one patootey about any copyright
for NeXT software, that doesn't make it legal (whether it is moral is
another question) for me to pirate that
My Reply follows quote. On 31/07/2002 13:27
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (R.A. Cantrell)
on 7/31/02 3:10 PM, william ahearn at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the case of currently available software I agree
with you.
I'm trying to direct the conversation toward this
At 19:22 -0400 on 31/07/02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of the underlying code may exist for several generations of the operating
system. Thus, the creator deserves to profit from his work. It would
He can have the code. I don't care. But if the company won't sell me the
software, by golly, they
on 7/31/02 6:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let's take a look:
the underlying code may exist for several generations of the operating
system. Thus, the creator
The creator? or the discoverer? The fellow who created 2+2=4 doesn't
deserves
necessarily deserve anything
on 7/31/02 6:49 PM, the pickle at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He can have the code. I don't care. But if the company won't sell me the
software, by golly, they don't have any damn business telling me I can't use
it.
I won't sell you my '56 Corvette and you can't use it.
--
All the best,
R.A.
At 19:41 -0500 on 31/07/02, R.A. Cantrell wrote:
on 7/31/02 6:49 PM, the pickle at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He can have the code. I don't care. But if the company won't sell me the
software, by golly, they don't have any damn business telling me I can't use
it.
I won't sell you my '56
I'll jump in here...
It's not the developer of the jpeg compression scheme that's trying to
enforce the patent, it's a holding company that acquired the rights to a
piece of the algorithm in a purchase of a another company. IIRC, the
patent expires in (literally) a couple months.
Read all
Jim Arnott wrote:
I'll jump in here...
It's not the developer of the jpeg compression scheme that's trying to
enforce the patent, it's a holding company that acquired the rights to a
piece of the algorithm in a purchase of a another company. IIRC, the
patent expires in (literally) a
Take a look at this stuff. It's pretty scary. This software discussion could
become
irrelevant. It could only be these old klunker computers with their
forgotten software that are safe.
That would make that unadultereated classicII in the closet the only safe
solution.
It's all ready there
All very true. There is a bill before Congress, that is expected to pass
shortly. I do not remember exactly what the main part of the bill is about,
but there is a rider attached to the end that would make it a serious felony
to bypass DRM technologies...! One can only hope for more sanity in the
At 01:24 -0400 on 01/08/02, Terry Mathews wrote:
All very true. There is a bill before Congress, that is expected to pass
shortly. I do not remember exactly what the main part of the bill is about,
but there is a rider attached to the end that would make it a serious felony
to bypass DRM
I have just subscribed to the digest mode. I've been gone for 15 hours, and
when I got back on I had almost 70 emails, mostly this copyrite stuff. I'm
not usually a goody-2-shoe, and I really don't mind off-topic disussions,
but hasn't this topic gone to the extremes?
As a former Napster user,
37 matches
Mail list logo
