Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

MEB wrote:

I see you have once again consciously determined to further this
piracy/criminal activity in this group once again. This would
appear to indicate that: ...

Copyright and copyright law exist to protect creative works, arguably to
protect the financial opportunity afforded by those works and convey
that benefit to the authors or the rights-holders.

In the case of Microsoft (the rights-holder) and the work (Windows 98),
please explain what financial interest the rights holder has to the
work, given that the rights-holder hasn't offered the work for
commercial sale for several years and by all accounts will never offer
it ever again.

How is Microsoft harmed, financially or otherwise, today, by those that
obtain and use Windows-98 by any means?

What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit to
Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of Windows 98?

And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items to
others?

~BD~ wrote:

May Jesus protect me from those that believe in Him.

He won't - of that you may be certain!

Oh don't worry. I'm quite certain of the limitations of a fictional
character.

You are 'standing into danger' my friend.

That's an odd phrase - "standing into danger".

The entity named "thanatoid" is near death and has decided that this
absolves it of any responsibilities.

Of course, "thanatoid" is an incredibly ignorant SOB, too.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"glee" wrote in message
...
Still blatantly promoting software piracy, I see.
BTW, you bit-torrent abusers are the reason Comcast will be putting caps
on monthly downloads for all their clients, and soon Time-Warner will be
restructuring their Internet service into more expensive tiers based on
monthly download capacity.

"98 Guy" wrote in message ...

--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
http://dts-l.net/
http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm

Hi ,

When I see a post like this, asking for a copy of a product that is
copyrighted, I wonder what goes through the mind of that individual and the
one the is trying to help him get a "free" copy. I believe that those
individuals have never heard of, or practiced integrity and/or morals. Maybe
they do not know right from wrong. Maybe they just don't care who they
cheat. One day, they will learn what goes down the devil's back comes up his
front. In other words, what goes around comes around. He may get a copy, but
he may get an infected copy.

Angel

"98 Guy" wrote in message ...
: Normanny wrote:
:
: Hi, anyone can provide me a copy of the Windows 98 Second Edition.
:
: Download and install a bit-torrent client. I've been using u-torrent
: recently.
:
: Then go to one of the bit-torrent directory sites and search for win-98
: torrents.
:
: Let's try this one:
:
:
http://dl.torrentreactor.net/downloa...dows+98+Second
+Edition+Full+Bootable+CD+%2B+CD+Key
:
: Ok, download complete.
:
: I downloaded a UIF converter from he
:
:
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/400...38.TPB.torrent
:
: It's a very small (32 kb) command-line executable (uif2iso.exe). I sent
: it to virustotal to be scanned, and it came back 100% negative.
:
: I ran it and created a 655 mb iso file. I burned the file to a cd using
: ECDC and I'm looking at it now.
:
: By all appearances it's a win-98se cd. File dates are 4/23/99, 10:22
: pm.
:
: I'm not sure if it's a retail cd, or an oem cd, or some other version.
: If there's a file on the cd (txt, dll, etc) that would identify the
: exact MS part or product number, then let me know.
:
: I performed a DOS-level comp command on the root directory and the
: \win98 directory on the CD against an image of a win-98se CD I have on
: my system and all files compared exactly (that's roughly 1/3 of the
: contents of the CD).
:
: So Normanny, go and do what I just did. You'll have a win-98se cd in
: your hands (and a few dozen product keys) in about 5 or 6 hours.

Angel wrote:

When I see a post like this, asking for a copy of a product that
is copyrighted, I wonder what goes through the mind of that
individual and the one the is trying to help him get a "free" copy.

Maybe you should ask yourself why the manufacturer of the product no
longer sells the product.

Then ask youself what harm is coming to the manufacturer because of the
obtainment of the "free" product.

I believe that those individuals have never heard of, or practiced
integrity and/or morals.

What high horse did you fall off of?

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that Microsoft suffered no
harm, because it no longer sells Windows 98.

Maybe they just don't care who they cheat.

Please explain how Microsoft was "cheated" in this event.

He may get a copy, but he may get an infected copy.

After checking 1/3 of the contents, I'm satisfied that it was a clean
copy.

The same ol'crap again... gees I made a web containing your last ramblings
attempting to further criminal acts across the world..

READ THE COPYRIGHT LAWS and other applicable for once {I asked before, you
can read can't you?}. When you have something of value that backs your
claims rather than stupid questions, and ideas based upon thin air, bring it
back up. Until then, your just another mindless, ignorant party engaged in
criminal activities attempting to bring others into your criminal
conspiracy, unduly affecting everyone else on this planet by furthering and
participating in such activity..

BTW: you were supposed to read those cases, laws, and the rest, so you COULD
have a viable debate... they answer all your questions AND debunk your
presentations. Of course that ends all discussion, but I'm sure you will
never read OR understand, so what's the point... you will continue to engage
in criminal activities until some one catches you, then likely turn State's
evidence by turning in your friends and associates while attempting to get a
plea bargain...

--
MEB
a Peoples' counsel
--
_________



"98 Guy" wrote in message ...
| MEB wrote:
|
| I see you have once again consciously determined to further this
| piracy/criminal activity in this group once again. This would
| appear to indicate that: ...
|
| Copyright and copyright law exist to protect creative works, arguably to
| protect the financial opportunity afforded by those works and convey
| that benefit to the authors or the rights-holders.
|
| In the case of Microsoft (the rights-holder) and the work (Windows 98),
| please explain what financial interest the rights holder has to the
| work, given that the rights-holder hasn't offered the work for
| commercial sale for several years and by all accounts will never offer
| it ever again.
|
| How is Microsoft harmed, financially or otherwise, today, by those that
| obtain and use Windows-98 by any means?
|
| What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit to
| Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of Windows 98?
|
| And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
| Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items to
| others?

MEB wrote:

READ THE COPYRIGHT LAWS and other applicable for once

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that I am questioning the
basis or logic behind some aspects of the copyright laws.

I am not disputing that the laws, as written, does give microsoft the
right to take copyright violators to court, and that this probably
extends to file, CD, and product-key sharing and the use of their
products that results from this sharing, regardless that it's for a
product they no longer sell.

You (and others) obviously are incapable of having a philosophical
discussion about why the benefit of copyright laws should extend to
works that are no longer and will never again be produced by the
rights-holder.

I nonetheless invite you (or anyone else) to answer these previously
proposed questions:

| What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit
| to Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of
| Windows 98?

| And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
| Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items
| to others?

I feel MEB has a valid concern that breaking laws in regards to software by
illegally copying it leads to more restrictions. I heard about the case at a
GameStop where someone sued Gamestop for selling them a used copy as new and
the only reason it wasn't new was someone returned the game because the
person did not like it. The lady lost the case but Gamestop changed their
policy of a 7 day return policy to a zero day return policy on new game
software unless the software is unopened and all the woman had to do was be
willing to just exchange the copy she was not satisfied with another game
copy. (Note: The stupidity of people is beyond even me sometimes)

"98 Guy" wrote:

MEB wrote:

READ THE COPYRIGHT LAWS and other applicable for once

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that I am questioning the
basis or logic behind some aspects of the copyright laws.

I am not disputing that the laws, as written, does give microsoft the
right to take copyright violators to court, and that this probably
extends to file, CD, and product-key sharing and the use of their
products that results from this sharing, regardless that it's for a
product they no longer sell.

You (and others) obviously are incapable of having a philosophical
discussion about why the benefit of copyright laws should extend to
works that are no longer and will never again be produced by the
rights-holder.

I nonetheless invite you (or anyone else) to answer these previously
proposed questions:

| What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit
| to Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of
| Windows 98?

| And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
| Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items
| to others?

98 Guy, please leave Angel alone. Microsoft was is indeed a copy and for
economic reasons Microsoft decided to abandon the 9x source code. To this
day, I still firmly think this was a huge mistake because now hackers can
concentrate on one line of business source code and it has made consumers
activities lots more dangerous because there is not the distinction between
consumer and cooperate customer anymore. Hopefully, Microsoft will
eventually develop a new source code that is really good and has the best
elements of the 9x source code, the NT source code and perhaps using open
source unix/linunx technologies to make a really good product but until that
day we all do what we can and I cannot promote piracy even if the product has
been abandoned and you are just willing to check 1/3 of the product -- what
happens if the baddie is buried deep within the other 2/3rds in a hidden
directory?

"98 Guy" wrote:

Angel wrote:

When I see a post like this, asking for a copy of a product that
is copyrighted, I wonder what goes through the mind of that
individual and the one the is trying to help him get a "free" copy.

Maybe you should ask yourself why the manufacturer of the product no
longer sells the product.

Then ask youself what harm is coming to the manufacturer because of the
obtainment of the "free" product.

I believe that those individuals have never heard of, or practiced
integrity and/or morals.

What high horse did you fall off of?

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that Microsoft suffered no
harm, because it no longer sells Windows 98.

Maybe they just don't care who they cheat.

Please explain how Microsoft was "cheated" in this event.

He may get a copy, but he may get an infected copy.

After checking 1/3 of the contents, I'm satisfied that it was a clean
copy.

This is the same garbage you attempted to extend the last time.. same
suggestions, different addressing points...

Rather than ask these baseless questions which raise no new material, why
not research the aspect of your issue with Microsoft and 9X to the extent of
presenting it to a court as a question for the court to answer??? Perhaps
with the abandonware, lack of use, and other you seem to believe separates
this issue from all the others of which and in which the courts HAVE
answered those questions.

This would achieve your supposed goal and answer ALL of your childlike
questions. Post your name and address and phone number with the illegal
commercial 9X software you "personally" offer free. Get yourself arrested
and then you will have your forum to expound from, your day in court...

My bet is that you will not do this because you are basically and
apparently gutless, moreover, without the knowledge or experience necessary
to support your claims. IN FACT, I AM quite sure you know there is no basis
for your presentation or your ideas regarding this path which you purport to
follow and continue to direct others to engage in.

So there it is, your soap box, your way to change the world: PUT UP OR SHUT
UP

--
MEB
a Peoples' counsel
--
_________



"98 Guy" wrote in message ...
| MEB wrote:
|
| READ THE COPYRIGHT LAWS and other applicable for once
|
| Why can't you get it through your thick skull that I am questioning the
| basis or logic behind some aspects of the copyright laws.
|
| I am not disputing that the laws, as written, does give microsoft the
| right to take copyright violators to court, and that this probably
| extends to file, CD, and product-key sharing and the use of their
| products that results from this sharing, regardless that it's for a
| product they no longer sell.
|
| You (and others) obviously are incapable of having a philosophical
| discussion about why the benefit of copyright laws should extend to
| works that are no longer and will never again be produced by the
| rights-holder.
|
| I nonetheless invite you (or anyone else) to answer these previously
| proposed questions:
|
| | What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit
| | to Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of
| | Windows 98?
|
| | And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
| | Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items
| | to others?