Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:16:54 07/21/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 1998 at 23:13:36, SEAN EVANS wrote: >On July 21, 1998 at 22:22:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>If it is commercially available for sale, and you got it for "free" then you >>*stole* it. There is *no* other definition that will fit. > >The Moron writes; > >Be careful Fernando as may have heard Bob has a Phd in Copyright law. He also >believes it is a criminal offence to cut and paste a portion of a Newsgroup >posting and threatened to sue me for that. > ><Bob Snip> >>So it's ok to steal 50 dollars, but not ok to steal 500 dollars? That is >>your argument, and I don't know of a judge/jury in the world that would buy >>such insanity. ><Bob Snip> > >Again a slight exageration and simplification of the situation. Of course >*most* of us have given a game or some software to a friend or family member. I >believe the key is to stop "Gross Negligence" for example setting up a Webpage >where the World can download the top ten (10) micros! > an ignorant argument. The key is to sell *one copy* of a piece of software for a *fixed price*. You want to run two copies, you pay for two copies. Giving away *one* copy of something is illegal. And there are no exceptions. As I said, hush, and read your software license agreement that came with each piece of software you bought. You *did* buy something somewhere along the way didn't you? If not, go to your friend's house, where you stole the copy and check *his* software license agreement. You don't buy the *software*.. you buy the *right to use* the software... according to the stipulations of the license agreement you agree to when you break the seal on the package. No rocket scientists needed to interpret that... ><Fernando Snip> >>>No being enough to qualify me as a thief, they say that my arguments are stupid,ridiculous, etc. So they qualify me also as an idiot. ><Fernando Snip> > >Remember Fernando the people that are able to say *anything* they wish and get >away with it are Computer Chess programmers that frequent this Newsgroup. >Notice that all three (3) Censors are programmers. In fact they all have/had >commercially available programs, so the argument will be skewed to their side! better check again. The three prior moderators had *no* commercial programs on the market. Bruce does not either. Amir does, Don did. > >Perhaps the election rules should change so at least one censor is a consumer of >these products. I did vote for you Fernando and strangely enough Thorsten >Czub/Mclane. > >Your friend in Computer Chess, > >Sean I would not vote for anyone as a moderator when they support the idea of stealing software. It is *illegal*.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.