![]() |
|
Welcome to Vista Banter. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to ask questions and reply to others posts, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
|
|||||||
| General Vista Help and Support The general Windows Vista discussion forum, for topics not covered elsewhere. (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general) |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not
technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. |
|
|||
|
They're probably a little more intelligent (Speaking as a reformed pirate
from the early 1990's/late 1980s). Someone said directly that there's nothing microsoft can do legally. And these people are doing it without shelling out the $350 to be a Technet member (that's really all it takes, intelligence is optional).. The day "click to agree to a license" locks you in to a contract agreement is the day I say "ooooooooookay" and stop using computers altogether (maybe switch 100% to free software/linux) because the last time I read a microsoft license agreement (we're talking 5 years ago) half of it (the bottom half) is in another language (I think french canadian) and I don't know how I can agree to a license in a language I can't understand. ON top of that, over the last ten year I've grown habituated to 'click agree to install' knowing it really means nothing because legally, it can't (I remember a joke I read in one of the freebie mags : "Burried deep in a license agreement : By clicking Accept you agree to become Bill Gates' personal slave."). The idea of a shrinkwrap license agreement is silly -- I say when you buy something you can do what you want with it so long as it's not physically/mentally harmful to others. The only "license limitation" is the Number of copies they'll let you install before requiring activation to stop you. I honestly question the legality of product activation. Imagine GE selling a light bulb and saying you can use it in ANY compatible lamp, but if you decide to put it in another lamp after the first one you put it in, it won't work. -Rob DIV"M@dhat3rr" > wrote in message .../DIV Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. |
|
|||
|
Rob, when you click 'I Agree' you are, in fact, signing a legal contract. Why
do you think a EULA exists? Just to have a txt file with a bunch of words? The only reason why Microsoft couldn't go after people is the ISPs won't give out the information associated with the IP. That and Microsoft, I don't think, has any idea how XP, 2000, Server 2003, Office, etc. etc. is distributed illegally. I tried to talk to Microsoft's anti-pirating ward, back in March I think, and the person had no... I mean NO idea what I was talking about. I was using terms like 'Beta build 5308', 'ISO', 'trackers', etc. and the woman was dumb-founded; claiming I don't know what that is..... for christs sake, she was working in the anti-piracy division! About the only thing she did understand was 'eBay'. I tell you, MS has some real idiots working anti-piracy. Here's an idea: associate a PK, with a MSDN, TechNet, TAP, or connect user. Use the PK to see who is leaking the images.... wow, I must be a genius. Considering that these pirates are posting on a Microsoft NG, shows something. So a person steals a beta build from Microsoft and posts on a Microsoft NG...mmmm. But yes, a EULA is a legally binding contract. "Rob Wilkens" wrote: They're probably a little more intelligent (Speaking as a reformed pirate from the early 1990's/late 1980s). Someone said directly that there's nothing microsoft can do legally. And these people are doing it without shelling out the $350 to be a Technet member (that's really all it takes, intelligence is optional).. The day "click to agree to a license" locks you in to a contract agreement is the day I say "ooooooooookay" and stop using computers altogether (maybe switch 100% to free software/linux) because the last time I read a microsoft license agreement (we're talking 5 years ago) half of it (the bottom half) is in another language (I think french canadian) and I don't know how I can agree to a license in a language I can't understand. ON top of that, over the last ten year I've grown habituated to 'click agree to install' knowing it really means nothing because legally, it can't (I remember a joke I read in one of the freebie mags : "Burried deep in a license agreement : By clicking Accept you agree to become Bill Gates' personal slave."). The idea of a shrinkwrap license agreement is silly -- I say when you buy something you can do what you want with it so long as it's not physically/mentally harmful to others. The only "license limitation" is the Number of copies they'll let you install before requiring activation to stop you. I honestly question the legality of product activation. Imagine GE selling a light bulb and saying you can use it in ANY compatible lamp, but if you decide to put it in another lamp after the first one you put it in, it won't work. -Rob DIV"M@dhat3rr" wrote in message .../DIV Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. |
|
|||
|
On 2006-08-27 07:27:50 -0400, "Rob Wilkens" said:
The day "click to agree to a license" locks you in to a contract agreement is the day I say "ooooooooookay" and stop using computers altogether (maybe switch 100% to free software/linux) because the last time I read a microsoft license agreement (we're talking 5 years ago) half of it (the bottom half) is in another language (I think french canadian) There's no such thing as a French Canadian language. French is French. There are differences between the French Canadian and the French keyboards. Mostly QWERTY vs AZERTY. |
|
|||
|
Amazing the accusations that fly off these boards. This build was available
to anyone who attended the BlackHat in Las Vegas and they were also given away on the Vista Security Blog: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:00 AM by windowsvistasecurity Flash Swag: Windows Vista Build 5472 DVD We have reached our limit. All the DVDs are gone. If you do not receive one you were not one of the first 75 people or you did not provide your shipping address. We hope to do more giveaways in the future so stay tuned. Hi, I’m Alex Heaton, a product manager on the Windows Vista security team and the keeper of the blog. My focus is User Account Control, and I was one of the people passing out the Windows Vista DVDs at Black Hat. We have a few DVDs of the new Windows Vista July EDW build (5472) left, and we want to share the rest of them with our blog readers. The first 75 people who send e-mail to [deleted] with your mailing address can get a DVD and product registration key. These copies expire May 31, 2007. We will not use your contact information for any other purpose and will delete all e-mails as soon as the DVDs are distributed. If you already have access to this build through one of the beta programs, please don’t request one of these DVDs so that someone else can get one. Thanks to everyone for reading and for your comments. - Alex (Comments now disabled for this post. No more DVD's are available.) "M@dhat3rr" wrote: Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. |
|
|||
|
I've noticed the same thing, but I wasn't going to say anything about it.
There are many people that simply can't afford a Technet or MSDN subscription (myself included). Fortunately, Connect is free if you can get an invite. -- Robert Firth http://www.winvistainfo.org "M@dhat3rr" wrote: Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. |
|
|||
|
To End Users???
Seriously, when I kill someone in other programs (video games) am I committing felony homicide? Why is clicking something in an install process any different? -Rob DIV"M@dhat3rr" > wrote in message .../DIV Rob, when you click 'I Agree' you are, in fact, signing a legal contract. Why do you think a EULA exists? Just to have a txt file with a bunch of words? The only reason why Microsoft couldn't go after people is the ISPs won't give out the information associated with the IP. That and Microsoft, I don't think, has any idea how XP, 2000, Server 2003, Office, etc. etc. is distributed illegally. I tried to talk to Microsoft's anti-pirating ward, back in March I think, and the person had no... I mean NO idea what I was talking about. I was using terms like 'Beta build 5308', 'ISO', 'trackers', etc. and the woman was dumb-founded; claiming I don't know what that is..... for christs sake, she was working in the anti-piracy division! About the only thing she did understand was 'eBay'. I tell you, MS has some real idiots working anti-piracy. Here's an idea: associate a PK, with a MSDN, TechNet, TAP, or connect user. Use the PK to see who is leaking the images.... wow, I must be a genius. Considering that these pirates are posting on a Microsoft NG, shows something. So a person steals a beta build from Microsoft and posts on a Microsoft NG...mmmm. But yes, a EULA is a legally binding contract. "Rob Wilkens" wrote: They're probably a little more intelligent (Speaking as a reformed pirate from the early 1990's/late 1980s). Someone said directly that there's nothing microsoft can do legally. And these people are doing it without shelling out the $350 to be a Technet member (that's really all it takes, intelligence is optional).. The day "click to agree to a license" locks you in to a contract agreement is the day I say "ooooooooookay" and stop using computers altogether (maybe switch 100% to free software/linux) because the last time I read a microsoft license agreement (we're talking 5 years ago) half of it (the bottom half) is in another language (I think french canadian) and I don't know how I can agree to a license in a language I can't understand. ON top of that, over the last ten year I've grown habituated to 'click agree to install' knowing it really means nothing because legally, it can't (I remember a joke I read in one of the freebie mags : "Burried deep in a license agreement : By clicking Accept you agree to become Bill Gates' personal slave."). The idea of a shrinkwrap license agreement is silly -- I say when you buy something you can do what you want with it so long as it's not physically/mentally harmful to others. The only "license limitation" is the Number of copies they'll let you install before requiring activation to stop you. I honestly question the legality of product activation. Imagine GE selling a light bulb and saying you can use it in ANY compatible lamp, but if you decide to put it in another lamp after the first one you put it in, it won't work. -Rob DIV"M@dhat3rr" wrote in message .../DIV Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. |
|
|||
|
Hello
I see that you are posting via Videotron from Quebec. Therefore you should know that there is quite a bit of difference between the 2 French languages. Although both are French the difference in composition and pronunciation and meaning differ in a lot of areas. As one example as below French from France you call Grapefruit as Grapefruit In Canadian French grapefruit is Pamplemouse. Quite a difference I would say as is many others Bye -- Daphne Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. "microfox" wrote in message news:2006082709284416807-nomail@allcom... On 2006-08-27 07:27:50 -0400, "Rob Wilkens" said: The day "click to agree to a license" locks you in to a contract agreement is the day I say "ooooooooookay" and stop using computers altogether (maybe switch 100% to free software/linux) because the last time I read a microsoft license agreement (we're talking 5 years ago) half of it (the bottom half) is in another language (I think french canadian) There's no such thing as a French Canadian language. French is French. There are differences between the French Canadian and the French keyboards. Mostly QWERTY vs AZERTY. |
|
|||
|
Hello
You also forgot MSDN among others. (vbs) -- Daphne Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged. "M@dhat3rr" wrote in message ... Rob, when you click 'I Agree' you are, in fact, signing a legal contract. Why do you think a EULA exists? Just to have a txt file with a bunch of words? The only reason why Microsoft couldn't go after people is the ISPs won't give out the information associated with the IP. That and Microsoft, I don't think, has any idea how XP, 2000, Server 2003, Office, etc. etc. is distributed illegally. I tried to talk to Microsoft's anti-pirating ward, back in March I think, and the person had no... I mean NO idea what I was talking about. I was using terms like 'Beta build 5308', 'ISO', 'trackers', etc. and the woman was dumb-founded; claiming I don't know what that is..... for christs sake, she was working in the anti-piracy division! About the only thing she did understand was 'eBay'. I tell you, MS has some real idiots working anti-piracy. Here's an idea: associate a PK, with a MSDN, TechNet, TAP, or connect user. Use the PK to see who is leaking the images.... wow, I must be a genius. Considering that these pirates are posting on a Microsoft NG, shows something. So a person steals a beta build from Microsoft and posts on a Microsoft NG...mmmm. But yes, a EULA is a legally binding contract. "Rob Wilkens" wrote: They're probably a little more intelligent (Speaking as a reformed pirate from the early 1990's/late 1980s). Someone said directly that there's nothing microsoft can do legally. And these people are doing it without shelling out the $350 to be a Technet member (that's really all it takes, intelligence is optional).. The day "click to agree to a license" locks you in to a contract agreement is the day I say "ooooooooookay" and stop using computers altogether (maybe switch 100% to free software/linux) because the last time I read a microsoft license agreement (we're talking 5 years ago) half of it (the bottom half) is in another language (I think french canadian) and I don't know how I can agree to a license in a language I can't understand. ON top of that, over the last ten year I've grown habituated to 'click agree to install' knowing it really means nothing because legally, it can't (I remember a joke I read in one of the freebie mags : "Burried deep in a license agreement : By clicking Accept you agree to become Bill Gates' personal slave."). The idea of a shrinkwrap license agreement is silly -- I say when you buy something you can do what you want with it so long as it's not physically/mentally harmful to others. The only "license limitation" is the Number of copies they'll let you install before requiring activation to stop you. I honestly question the legality of product activation. Imagine GE selling a light bulb and saying you can use it in ANY compatible lamp, but if you decide to put it in another lamp after the first one you put it in, it won't work. -Rob DIV"M@dhat3rr" wrote in message .../DIV Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. |
|
|||
|
"M@dhat3rr" wrote in message
... Recently, I've noticed some people on here who have 5472 & 5536, who are not technet members, hence pirates. I'm alittle surprised that people who pirate Vista have the intelligence (or lack thereof) to post here; asking for help on a Microsoft created newsgroup. I know most of you will say "So what? It's a beta release". Non-the-less, a pirate is a pirate, right? Now we all know that Microsoft isn't loosing any money from pirated betas, and the people who ask for support for it, from us. But isn't right, right; and wrong, wrong? I guess I'll be more careful about answering questions here. I don't know if I'm one of the ones you are talking about but perhaps you should be a bit more careful with your accusations. I was added to the beta list by one of my users who happened to be a Microsoft employee. The nomination was approved and I was invited to register on the Connect beta site. That's how I got access to 5536. I'm no pirate. |