Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

Buffalo,
Apology accepted.
Angel

"Buffalo" wrote in message
. ..
:
:
: Angel wrote:
: Thanks Dan,
:
: You have just asked "98 Guy" the same question I was going to ask. He
: checked ONLY 1/3rd of the downloaded Pirated Win98SE? Maybe he is in
: for a great surprise!! Of course, he is a "know it all" and no matter
: what. In his own opinion, he is never wrong no matter what! He is
: just a Troll! looking for someone to pick on.
:
: Angel
:
: Sorry about my last post about you Angel, I just had to yell at someone
: yesterday.
: My apologies.
: Buffalo
:
:

"98 Guy" wrote in message ...

Why does a work that is no longer and WILL NEVER AGAIN be manufactured
or sold deserve copyright protection?

Desert has nothing to do with it. If your Aunt Flossie
writes poems they become by that act her intellectual
property. If she publishes a book that sells 12 copies
and is then remaindered and pulped, thus unobtainable,
the poems remain her property for either X years or her lifetime
plus Y years, depending on the country concerned. This means
no one else has the right to repriint them. Desert (yours or mine
or Aunt Flossie's) has nothing to do with this property right.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Buffalo,

Maybe (98 Guy) knows more about computers, I am learning more about them
every day. He seems to know NOTHING about Scruples, Morals and Integrity, or
he just doesn't care about what the difference is between right and wrong.
This subject has nothing to do with computer knowledge. This concerns the
difference between right and wrong, scruples, morality and integrity,
nothing else.

Angel

"Buffalo" wrote in message
. ..
:
:
: Bill in Co. wrote:
: Buffalo wrote:
: Angel wrote:
: Thanks Dan,
:
: You have just asked "98 Guy" the same question I was going to ask.
: He checked ONLY 1/3rd of the downloaded Pirated Win98SE? Maybe he
: is in for a great surprise!! Of course, he is a "know it all" and
: no matter what. In his own opinion, he is never wrong no matter
: what! He is just a Troll! looking for someone to pick on.
:
: Angel
:
: And who might you just be??
:
: She is Angel.
:
: Well, Duh? I think he (98 Guy) knows a hell of a lot more about Win98
: and computers than Angel.
:
:

Dave,

No, it is not my website. No, I have not even tried to go to it. Don't think
I will go to it neither. I am too busy!!

Angel

"~BD~" wrote in message
...
:
: "Angel" wrote in message
: ...
: Thanks Dan,
:
: You have just asked "98 Guy" the same question I was going to ask. He
: checked ONLY 1/3rd of the downloaded Pirated Win98SE? Maybe he is in for
a
: great surprise!! Of course, he is a "know it all" and no matter what. In
: his
: own opinion, he is never wrong no matter what! He is just a Troll!
looking
: for someone to pick on.
:
: Angel
:
: "Dan" wrote in message
: ...
: : 98 Guy, please leave Angel alone.
:
: snip
:
: --
:
: Hi Angel!
:
: Is it possible that this is *your* web site?
:
: http://www.i-techangel.com/
:
: Even if it's not, Dan may enjoy it! (maybe you too!)
:
: Dave
:
: --
:
:

Let me clarify some of the main items which apply;
{NOTE: this is NOT a full listing] :

Right to distribute;
Ownership;
Patented code;
Trademark;
Copyright;
limited contract [like lease]

Every time someone unlawfully distributes the OS OR knowingly uses such
unlawful software, they commit and/or violate:
the above;
theft;
fraud;
defraud;
contractual violations.

Who has responsibility to prosecute?
Every prosecutor, solicitor, barrister, attorney general, and the like
across the world for defined criminal violations.

As I previously indicated to you and others in prior discussions, Microsoft
ENJOYS the full protections of ALL applicable Law in EVERY nation. That's
every: Treaty; code and/or statute [such as U.C.C]; commercial agreements
[public and private]; NAFTA; WTO; EUCA/EUTA; U.N. agreements, international
Laws, and Treaties; etc..

Need Microsoft complain? No, the Laws are specific in that it lay with the
legally defined responsible parties to protect it.
Microsoft CAN, however, take issue with ANY responsible party, anywhere,
who FAILS to protect it. Politics can apply, but the shear weight that
Microsoft brings to bear can effectuate compliance.

The "gray area" lay in the updates and modifications [such as the 2004
Security CD or other *updates*]. These REQUIRE a Microsoft OS to have the
valuable consideration of use; without the OS they are essentially valueless
[other than to Microsoft] because they can not be used without the OS. Take
all of the updates or modifications, put them together and you will not have
a working environment.
Therein lay the issue; if they have no use UNLESS there is a qualifying OS
lawfully held, distribution WITHOUT costs [commercial enrichment] seems to
qualify more as a public service IMO. Even here though there are other "gray
areas" such as modifications to those update files [Such as: does this
extend reverse engineering principles?]. There again though, without a
qualifying OS, they also are essentially useless [though not without value].
Another "gray area" lays within the disallowance that seems to imply within
the EULA concerning use of your lawfully held CDROM or files, and its use
upon another's lawfully held computer with a separately licensed OS [such as
for a repair], wherein the controlling terms and conditions seem to be
overly broad and unduly restrictive.

You asked for my opinion:

I have previously posted that in my opinion, Microsoft should release this
code to the public arena. Microsoft should also relieve the users of their
present contractual agreements. It is clear that the newer computers do not
[for the most part] support the coding limitations within the 9X
environment. The designed in limitations of the OSs [95, 98, 98SE, ME] also
would preclude the type of computing that many/most people now desire.
Manufacturers MIGHT begin producing legacy boards and devices, but the user
base is not all that great. Hence, the commercial value to Microsoft is
essentially non-existent.
The applicable patents [such as Fat32; e.g., specific to 9X/DOS] also seems
to be essentially valueless when taken with the newer HD sizes and other
hardware and chipsets. There are other aspects which would also appear to
indicate that the commercial/investor value is essential non-existent to
Microsoft, so public release would NOT seem to support a resurgence of
computers which CAN run the OS to Microsoft's detriment. In fact, that MIGHT
help with Microsoft's public relationship, which is not all that great
around the world.

I came to this discussion group *in this public form* prior to the "End of
Support"/End of Life for 9X [about a year or so before]. I was fully
prepared to brief on behalf of the affected People related to WHY there
should be continuation, OR that it should be released to the public for
further development/use. No one apparently had any major problems or voiced
much discontent, and, really, still don't. Of the potential millions still
using the 9X OSs, those voicing support for even the code release are
insufficient/insignificant.
I also personally take issue with the apparent fact that manufacturers have
removed support files, and/or as some suggest, removed support from files
which previously had such contained within them.
I also take personal issue with the fact that the programming environments
have apparently complete removed or intentionally disabled the ability to
program for the 9X code environment. There is no need and would not cause
undue issues if still included within those applications. As I have
previously indicated, the 9X code environment is "stable" [un-changing] so
there is no need to constantly modify anything within the application's
programming [the actual programming application]. Here its
mostly/apparently, merely a matter of cutting and pasting the coding
specific to 9X within the programming application when its updated. The code
already exists; there is no apparent reason not to include it [of course
that would still require the Libraries and other for the 9X code
environment]. We can see SOME manufacturer's still including 9X support, so
that's a rather obvious display of how easy it is to continue support, and
we also can find a small number still provide multiple cross platform
applications [9X through VISTA] so that also indicates that is easily
achievable..

HOWEVER:

Until Microsoft releases its holds on 9X code and the users, what you
intend and openly solicit is unlawful, illegal, and criminal in nature. That
you have openly admitted to such activities in a public forum appears to
indicate you are not a very intelligent person.

--
MEB
a Peoples' counsel
--
_________

Reply below.

"Angel" wrote in message ...

Dave,

No, it is not my website. No, I have not even tried to go to it. Don't think
I will go to it neither. I am too busy!!

Angel

"~BD~" wrote in message
...
:
: "Angel" wrote in message
: ...
: Thanks Dan,
:
: You have just asked "98 Guy" the same question I was going to ask. He
: checked ONLY 1/3rd of the downloaded Pirated Win98SE? Maybe he is in for
a
: great surprise!! Of course, he is a "know it all" and no matter what. In
: his
: own opinion, he is never wrong no matter what! He is just a Troll!
looking
: for someone to pick on.
:
: Angel
:
: "Dan" wrote in message
: ...
: : 98 Guy, please leave Angel alone.
:
: snip
:
: --
:
: Hi Angel!
:
: Is it possible that this is *your* web site?
:
: http://www.i-techangel.com/
:
: Even if it's not, Dan may enjoy it! (maybe you too!)
:
: Dave
:
: --



Well, thank you for taking the time to let me know, Angel.

Dave

--

Angel wrote:
Buffalo,

Maybe (98 Guy) knows more about computers, I am learning more about them
every day. He seems to know NOTHING about Scruples, Morals and Integrity,
or
he just doesn't care about what the difference is between right and wrong.
This subject has nothing to do with computer knowledge. This concerns the
difference between right and wrong, scruples, morality and integrity,
nothing else.
Angel

"scruples, morality and integrity"??? Wrong era and wrong generation for
that! You old fogie, you!!!!


"Buffalo" wrote in message
. ..


Bill in Co. wrote:
Buffalo wrote:
Angel wrote:
Thanks Dan,

You have just asked "98 Guy" the same question I was going to ask.
He checked ONLY 1/3rd of the downloaded Pirated Win98SE? Maybe he
is in for a great surprise!! Of course, he is a "know it all" and
no matter what. In his own opinion, he is never wrong no matter
what! He is just a Troll! looking for someone to pick on.

Angel

And who might you just be??

She is Angel.

Well, Duh? I think he (98 Guy) knows a hell of a lot more about
Win98
and computers than Angel.

James Hahn wrote:

Why does a work that is no longer and WILL NEVER AGAIN be
manufactured or sold deserve copyright protection?

How is the holder of such a work harmed by the non-profit,
non-commercial replication and use of that work?

And don't blow off those questions by telling me to do
research.

Firstly, why don't you do the research

Why don't you provide a counter-argument.

Why should a work that *will never again* be manufactured or sold need
copyright protection?

Why should such a work deserve copyright protection?

If you know the reason, or you have a logical argument, then state it.

If *you* want to perform research to come up with a counter argument,
then do so. The onus is on you (or MEB) to provide a counter argument.

When you find a single jurisdiction that ties the
enforcement of copyright to some potential or
actual ability of the rights-holder to profit
from the creative work,

I never said that copyright benefits should take into account the
potential for gain, revenue or profit.

A more rational copyright law could be structured as:

a) a work that was never made public could / would be protected.

b) a work that has been made public, and continues to be, could / would
be protected.

c) A work that was once made public, but has ceased to be so for some
period of time, would lose some of it's protection.

By "made public", I mean any form of presentation to the public, be it
as an exhibition, broadcast, reproduction for sale or lease, etc.

In a way that is similar to the protection given by a patent. A patent
is a form of intellectual property that is disclosed in return for a
period of protection to allow the patent holder to profit from the
patent. It does not require the holder to do anything, and indeed the
holder may do nothing to seek financial gain from the patent.

A copyrighted work is also a form of intellectual property. One can
argue that software should not be copyrighted but instead should be
patented because sofware performs work or exhibits functionality, while
most or all conventional forms of copyrighted materials (music, movies,
books, art, etc) do not perform work or have any inherent functionality
of any sort.

So instead of enacting a time-limited protection for software that
starts the moment it is made available to the public, a comprimise would
be that software would have full copyright protection while it is
publically available, but would lose some aspects of it's protection
perhaps several years after it is has been withdrawn from public
availability.

~BD~ wrote:

You are 'standing into danger' my friend.

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

Not odd at all .......... especially if one has a nautical bent!

Well, then, in that case - wouldn't "sailing into danger" be better?

MEB wrote:

The determinative action is the right to *distribute* or not,,,
Microsoft holds that right, you and others hold no such authority...

So those that are selling Windows on E-bay are violating copyright law -
are they not?

Aren't they "distributing" it - by way of sale?

The whole ridiculous argument you raise is that because Microsoft
has purportedly chosen NOT to distribute 98 then you SHOULD have
that right...

What is really the issue is the USE of Windows 98 in a way that violates
the EULA.

I might burn a copy of Windows-98 on a stack of CD's and put them in a
closet. Does that cause harm or result in a loss of revenue for
Microsoft?

Does that violate the EULA? How would I know what the EULA is unless I
stick one of those CD's into a computer and boot it? What if I never
do?

I might hand out each CD to a friend, and they all might throw it away
or put it in their closet. Does that cause harm or result in a loss of
revenue for Microsoft?

The real issue is not really that CD's are copied or torrents are
transfering copies of the CD between people.

What matters is this:

Are there any installations of Windows-98 where the license to use the
software can't be traced back to a lawful sale of said licence by
Microsoft?

For example - if Microsoft sold a total of 100 million Windows-98
licenses world-wide, but if at any given point in time there were 100
million and 1 functioning installations of Windows-98, then it could be
said that Microsoft has been harmed and has suffered some financial loss
due to the 1 install that has no corresponding legal license.

There may now (in 2008) be 10 million functioning installations of
Windows 98, which means there are 90 million licenses that have become
lost, abandoned or discarded. Microsoft can't claim harm, even today,
unless the number of systems running Windows-98 rises to above 100
million, or the number of copies of windows-98 being made available for
sale (on e-bay, etc) exceeds 90 million.

yeah sure, so if the car dealer refuses to sell that *classic*
car, you should be able to steal it and sell or give it away...

Microsoft has already sold the rights (or licences) for millions of
individual installations of Windows-98.

It's like there are millions of that "classic car". Some have owners
who are driving them. Most are sitting around, abandond, on the street,
in the wilderness, in the garbage dump - and you can just go and take
them. Once a car company has sold a car to the first purchaser (which
is usually the dealer) they have no interest in the car after that -
like the ownership history, who buys it from who, who steals it from
whom, etc.

Since NO ONE other than Microsoft has ever actually OWNED the
software, you have absolutely no authority.

But someone DID purchase a license to USE the software, and that license
is NOT time-limited and there is NO prohibition against transfer.

The replication or distribution of a win-98 CD is irrelevant - I might
use it as a coaster or frisbee.

It's the installation and use of win-98 with or without a bona fide
license (product key) - that IS the issue.

Because in the end, as you say, Microsoft is selling the RIGHT to USE
the the software. And once they sell _a_ right, that right continues to
exist regardless who possesses it or how they came to possess it.