Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Vista I will not be buying

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 5:45:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I apologize for the rant.

http://snipurl.com/hbl7

I have made my decision

Vista I will not be buying.

No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.

I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.

If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.

Greg Ro

More about : vista buying

Anonymous
August 30, 2005 10:47:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
> I apologize for the rant.
>
> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>
> I have made my decision
>
> Vista I will not be buying.
>
> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>
> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>
> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.

So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
in any way?

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 10:47:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

>In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
>> I apologize for the rant.
>>
>> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>
>> I have made my decision
>>
>> Vista I will not be buying.
>>
>> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>>
>> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>
>> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>
>So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
>media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
>in any way?

Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
steal.

The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
period.

Let use this analogy.
Some one builds you a home.
They put a private room in
Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
access to it. Even through it is in your own house.



Greg Ro
Related resources
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 10:47:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7e73d9526770f6989dcb@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
>> I apologize for the rant.
>>
>> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>
>> I have made my decision
>>
>> Vista I will not be buying.
>>
>> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>>
>> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>
>> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>
> So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
> media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
> in any way?

I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as other
electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what is considered
fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a backup CD of software or
music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This is not a piracy issue in my case,
although I can see it being so for some others.
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 10:47:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Leythos wrote:
> In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
> says...
>> I apologize for the rant.
>>
>> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>
>> I have made my decision
>>
>> Vista I will not be buying.
>>
>> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>>
>> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>
>> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
>> system.
>
> So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to
> steal media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to
> limit you in any way?

Hey Lameboy! PA and WGA already screw people who have stolen nothing at
all. More copy-protection will garner more problem for people doing
absolutely nothing illegal.

So F*#K YOU and all your BILLIONAIRE Hollywood & Redmond buddies. You
are a total brownshirt for the corporate copyright elite.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 10:47:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7e73d9526770f6989dcb@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

> In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...

>> I apologize for the rant.
>>
>> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>
>> I have made my decision
>>
>> Vista I will not be buying.
>>
>> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>>
>> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>
>> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.

> So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
> media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
> in any way?

That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

DS
August 30, 2005 10:51:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

GregRo wrote:
> I apologize for the rant.
>
> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>
> I have made my decision
>
> Vista I will not be buying.
>
> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>
> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>
> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>
> Greg Ro

I hope you can sleep at night if Microsoft goes bankrupt.

--
If there is a Tourist Season, how come we can't shoot them?
Anonymous
August 30, 2005 10:51:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

relic wrote:
> GregRo wrote:
>> I apologize for the rant.
>>
>> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>
>> I have made my decision
>>
>> Vista I will not be buying.
>>
>> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>>
>> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>
>> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
>> system. Greg Ro
>
> I hope you can sleep at night if Microsoft goes bankrupt.

LOL! The software piracy rate was much higher in 1994 than it was in
2000 before MS implimented its copy-protection, PA. I don't seem to
remember that MS was anywhere close to bankruptcy!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
August 30, 2005 11:39:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

GregRo wrote:

> I apologize for the rant.
>
> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>
> I have made my decision
>
> Vista I will not be buying.
>
> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>
> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>
> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>
> Greg Ro

Who cares what you do - stick or don't stick - who cares.

--
Rock
MS MVP Windows - Shell/User
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:05:01 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Hello, Thanks for the information.
Certain people do not understand the erosion of basic rights. No matter what
they state they "just don't get it".
Microsoft may have future problems but not with file sharing or copying in
the U.S. or Europe. Their problem will be with China, India and Google.
take care.
beamish.

"GregRo" wrote:

> I apologize for the rant.
>
> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>
> I have made my decision
>
> Vista I will not be buying.
>
> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>
> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>
> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>
> Greg Ro
>
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:20:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
@yes.lycs.com says...
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>
> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
> >> I apologize for the rant.
> >>
> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
> >>
> >> I have made my decision
> >>
> >> Vista I will not be buying.
> >>
> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
> >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
> >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
> >>
> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
> >>
> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
> >
> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
> >media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
> >in any way?
>
> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
> steal.
>
> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
> to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
> period.
>
> Let use this analogy.
> Some one builds you a home.
> They put a private room in
> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.

Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
legal right to it - what part are you left without?

Your analogy should be more like:

You buy a house.
You want to make crack in it.
The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
You start making crack.
You get your home taken away by the government.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:20:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:20:22 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

>In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
>@yes.lycs.com says...
>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
>> >> I apologize for the rant.
>> >>
>> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>> >>
>> >> I have made my decision
>> >>
>> >> Vista I will not be buying.
>> >>
>> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>> >>
>> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>> >>
>> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>> >
>> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
>> >media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
>> >in any way?
>>
>> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
>> steal.
>>
>> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
>> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
>> to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
>> period.
>>
>> Let use this analogy.
>> Some one builds you a home.
>> They put a private room in
>> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
>> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
>
>Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
>want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
>legal right to it - what part are you left without?
>
>Your analogy should be more like:
>
>You buy a house.
>You want to make crack in it.
>The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
>You start making crack.
>You get your home taken away by the government.



My point is I want to have access to everything on may hard drive and
in my computer.

If I choose to break a law that is my choice not the operating system.
I don't need a net nanny that for kids. Which I don't break any laws
for the record. Microsoft and Hollywood assumes everyone is a
criminal out to get them.

What if a virus, spyware, or adware program got into the protected
area and the virus, spyware or adware protection program could not
clean it out? This will happen.

If you want to buy vista go right ahead. I made my decision based on
those and other articles.

If every I do get vista is will be only because a job requires or
Microsoft sent me a free version


Greg Ro
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:20:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7e899d5fa42d47989dd1@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

> Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
> want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
> legal right to it - what part are you left without?
>
> Your analogy should be more like:
>
> You buy a house.
> You want to make crack in it.
> The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
> You start making crack.
> You get your home taken away by the government.

The OS has no capability to determine what is legal and what is not. All
it can do is enforce a configured policy, configured by a person who may or
may not know what is legal. The whole point of this type of technology is to
permit the enforcement of restrictions that are *not* found in the law.

DS
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:26:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <uDY#XAarFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, ntotrr@optonline.net
says...
> I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as other
> electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what is considered
> fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a backup CD of software or
> music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This is not a piracy issue in my case,
> although I can see it being so for some others.

From what I've read, it only limits actions of what most of us would
consider pirating materials. Right now, if I stick my CD in the drive
and have WMP rip it to MP3's, it checks something and lets me do it -
and adds a license for it to my machine.

Seems to me that only pirates will have any issues with doing illegal
things with Vista. Read his link if you want to see.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:26:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Leythos wrote:
> In article <uDY#XAarFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>,
> ntotrr@optonline.net says...
>> I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as
>> other electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what
>> is considered fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a
>> backup CD of software or music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This
>> is not a piracy issue in my case, although I can see it being so for
>> some others.
>
> From what I've read, it only limits actions of what most of us would
> consider pirating materials. Right now, if I stick my CD in the drive
> and have WMP rip it to MP3's, it checks something and lets me do it -
> and adds a license for it to my machine.
>
> Seems to me that only pirates will have any issues with doing illegal
> things with Vista. Read his link if you want to see.

The imagined pirates of the corporate copyright elite, those that
exercise their legal "fair use" rights.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:26:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:o V6ZLOarFHA.1252@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Leythos wrote:
>> In article <uDY#XAarFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>,
>> ntotrr@optonline.net says...
>>> I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as
>>> other electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what
>>> is considered fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a
>>> backup CD of software or music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This
>>> is not a piracy issue in my case, although I can see it being so for
>>> some others.
>>
>> From what I've read, it only limits actions of what most of us would
>> consider pirating materials. Right now, if I stick my CD in the drive
>> and have WMP rip it to MP3's, it checks something and lets me do it -
>> and adds a license for it to my machine.
>>
>> Seems to me that only pirates will have any issues with doing illegal
>> things with Vista. Read his link if you want to see.
>
> The imagined pirates of the corporate copyright elite, those that exercise
> their legal "fair use" rights.


The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at least
five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely by the MPAA,
RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both Clinton and Bush.

see

www.eff.org
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:38:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <3nju9hF1taitU1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:20:22 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>
> >In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
> >@yes.lycs.com says...
> >> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
> >> >> I apologize for the rant.
> >> >>
> >> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
> >> >>
> >> >> I have made my decision
> >> >>
> >> >> Vista I will not be buying.
> >> >>
> >> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
> >> >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
> >> >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
> >> >>
> >> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
> >> >
> >> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
> >> >media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
> >> >in any way?
> >>
> >> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
> >> steal.
> >>
> >> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
> >> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
> >> to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
> >> period.
> >>
> >> Let use this analogy.
> >> Some one builds you a home.
> >> They put a private room in
> >> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
> >> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
> >
> >Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
> >want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
> >legal right to it - what part are you left without?
> >
> >Your analogy should be more like:
> >
> >You buy a house.
> >You want to make crack in it.
> >The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
> >You start making crack.
> >You get your home taken away by the government.
>
>
>
> My point is I want to have access to everything on may hard drive and
> in my computer.
>
> If I choose to break a law that is my choice not the operating system.
> I don't need a net nanny that for kids. Which I don't break any laws
> for the record. Microsoft and Hollywood assumes everyone is a
> criminal out to get them.
>
> What if a virus, spyware, or adware program got into the protected
> area and the virus, spyware or adware protection program could not
> clean it out? This will happen.
>
> If you want to buy vista go right ahead. I made my decision based on
> those and other articles.
>
> If every I do get vista is will be only because a job requires or
> Microsoft sent me a free version

There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you can
copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area reserved
on your drive?

Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:38:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7e8dd6ef6522b2989dd4@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

> There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you can
> copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area reserved
> on your drive?
>
> Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.

Suppose a virus or other piece of malware managed to protect itself such
that I could not copy it. That would mean that I could not send it to an
expert for analysis or copy it onto another uninfected machine myself to
figure out how to disentangle it from my system.

Right?

DS
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 3:38:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <11h9p8mlgb14vd4@corp.supernews.com>, none@none.net says...
> The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at least
> five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely by the MPAA,
> RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both Clinton and Bush.

And how is that relevant to Vista? If vista does not stop one from doing
legal things, then it's not really an issue, is it.


--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 3:38:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Leythos wrote:
> In article <11h9p8mlgb14vd4@corp.supernews.com>, none@none.net says...
>> The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at
>> least five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely
>> by the MPAA, RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both
>> Clinton and Bush.
>
> And how is that relevant to Vista? If vista does not stop one from
> doing legal things, then it's not really an issue, is it.

If you hardware doesn't meet some arbitrary MS/Hollywood requirement,
then you won't be able to view hi-def video content.

That is an erosion of my "fair use" rights on the hi-def equipment I
already own.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 4:11:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <#Zh8a7brFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...
> Leythos wrote:
> > In article <11h9p8mlgb14vd4@corp.supernews.com>, none@none.net says...
> >> The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at
> >> least five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely
> >> by the MPAA, RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both
> >> Clinton and Bush.
> >
> > And how is that relevant to Vista? If vista does not stop one from
> > doing legal things, then it's not really an issue, is it.
>
> If you hardware doesn't meet some arbitrary MS/Hollywood requirement,
> then you won't be able to view hi-def video content.
>
> That is an erosion of my "fair use" rights on the hi-def equipment I
> already own.

I my wide screen TV is not HI-DEF ready, so I suppose that my rights
have been eroded too.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 4:16:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in
news:MPG.1d7e899d5fa42d47989dd1@news-server.columbus.rr.com:

> In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
> @yes.lycs.com says...
>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
>> >says...
>> >> I apologize for the rant.
>> >>
>> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>> >>
>> >> I have made my decision
>> >>
>> >> Vista I will not be buying.
>> >>
>> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of
>> >> the computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or
>> >> adaware got into that protected area and a virus program could not
>> >> clean it.
>> >>
>> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>> >>
>> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
>> >> system.
>> >
>> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to
>> >steal media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to
>> >limit you in any way?
>>
>> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
>> steal.
>>
>> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
>> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
>> to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
>> period.
>>
>> Let use this analogy.
>> Some one builds you a home.
>> They put a private room in
>> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
>> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
>
> Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
> want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have
> a legal right to it - what part are you left without?
>
> Your analogy should be more like:
>
> You buy a house.
> You want to make crack in it.
> The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
> You start making crack.
> You get your home taken away by the government.
>

The real weak link in all of this stuff from Microsoft is the fact that
human beings experience the world in an analog fashion. The sound we
hear - no matter how well protected has to be converted to an audible
signal and the video we see has to be converted to a visual one - no
amount of digital protection will stop a fully protected device from
displaying its picture and speakers producing their sound.

I have an inline scan converter that the VGA output from the computer
attaches to - and then passes on to the computer. While inside the
little gizmo - it splits the video out to a NTSC standard output I have
attached to the VCR/DVD recorder. I bought a signal splitter for $2.00
for the audio and run one line into the VCR/DVD and the other into the
computer. Slower method of capture of course - real-time, instead os
just capturing bits - but works fine.

The articles I have read have stated Microsoft might fuzzy up the picture
so that HDTV quality would not be there - but would equal DVD-quality at
present-levels. I can live with that.

This "new" scheme is just that - a new "scheme" - the articles have
stated it will only work on Windows Media - so Microsoft is probably
salivating on how much money they can make selling something that will
not work - just as surely as DRM does not. Yes it works digitally - but
again folks live in an analog world and it does not work. Being doing
this for years with internet audio I wanted to capture - just hook the
audio out into my Dolby Digital Tape Recorder and capture on metal oxide
tape with excellent sound - and digital too!!

cya

a fools game from Microsoft on DRM
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 4:27:22 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

evieg <evieg@noway.com> wrote in
news:Xns96C2C42295B47eviegcom@207.69.189.191:

> Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in
> news:MPG.1d7e899d5fa42d47989dd1@news-server.columbus.rr.com:
>
>> In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
>> @yes.lycs.com says...
>>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
>>> >says...
>>> >> I apologize for the rant.
>>> >>
>>> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>> >>
>>> >> I have made my decision
>>> >>
>>> >> Vista I will not be buying.
>>> >>
>>> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of
>>> >> the computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or
>>> >> adaware got into that protected area and a virus program could
>>> >> not clean it.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>> >>
>>> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
>>> >> system.
>>> >
>>> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to
>>> >steal media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor
>>> >to limit you in any way?
>>>
>>> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
>>> steal.
>>>
>>> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
>>> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I
>>> want to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
>>> period.
>>>
>>> Let use this analogy.
>>> Some one builds you a home.
>>> They put a private room in
>>> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
>>> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
>>
>> Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
>> want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have
>> a legal right to it - what part are you left without?
>>
>> Your analogy should be more like:
>>
>> You buy a house.
>> You want to make crack in it.
>> The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
>> You start making crack.
>> You get your home taken away by the government.
>>
>
> The real weak link in all of this stuff from Microsoft is the fact
> that human beings experience the world in an analog fashion. The
> sound we hear - no matter how well protected has to be converted to an
> audible signal and the video we see has to be converted to a visual
> one - no amount of digital protection will stop a fully protected
> device from displaying its picture and speakers producing their sound.
>
> I have an inline scan converter that the VGA output from the computer
> attaches to - and then passes on to the computer. While inside the
> little gizmo - it splits the video out to a NTSC standard output I
> have attached to the VCR/DVD recorder. I bought a signal splitter for
> $2.00 for the audio and run one line into the VCR/DVD and the other
> into the computer. Slower method of capture of course - real-time,
> instead os just capturing bits - but works fine.
>
> The articles I have read have stated Microsoft might fuzzy up the
> picture so that HDTV quality would not be there - but would equal
> DVD-quality at present-levels. I can live with that.
>
> This "new" scheme is just that - a new "scheme" - the articles have
> stated it will only work on Windows Media - so Microsoft is probably
> salivating on how much money they can make selling something that will
> not work - just as surely as DRM does not. Yes it works digitally -
> but again folks live in an analog world and it does not work. Being
> doing this for years with internet audio I wanted to capture - just
> hook the audio out into my Dolby Digital Tape Recorder and capture on
> metal oxide tape with excellent sound - and digital too!!
>
> cya
>
> a fools game from Microsoft on DRM

Just an extra note:

if all else fails - I just point my Sony Digital Camcorder at the screen
making certain of correct settings, etc and a perfect copy also the
achieved.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 4:37:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

>
> Just an extra note:
>
> if all else fails - I just point my Sony Digital Camcorder at the screen
> making certain of correct settings, etc and a perfect copy also the
> achieved.

By the way (BTW)

When I say screen I mean computer monitor or television set - I do not mean
going into a Movie Theatre and using a Camcorder. I have looked at some of
that stuff and it is useless quality. I fully meant creating good quality
from and within your own environment and Microsoft should stay out of my
living room. Period.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 6:07:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <df310r$4pq$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
says...
> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
> more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
> keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

But the vendor isn't doing anything that would impact anyone that isn't
doing anything unethical - at least nothing anyone has mentioned points
to the vendor blocking anything ethical.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 6:09:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <df315l$4ps$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
says...
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d7e8dd6ef6522b2989dd4@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
>
> > There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you can
> > copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area reserved
> > on your drive?
> >
> > Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.
>
> Suppose a virus or other piece of malware managed to protect itself such
> that I could not copy it. That would mean that I could not send it to an
> expert for analysis or copy it onto another uninfected machine myself to
> figure out how to disentangle it from my system.

It doesn't say that it will block access to files at the kernel layer,
only that you won't be able to pirate them - why would you assume that
virus scanners and such won't find them or that you can't delete them.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 6:17:32 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7edae1c6a8e429989dd8@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <df310r$4pq$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
> says...
>> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
>> himself
>> more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
>> keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.
>
> But the vendor isn't doing anything that would impact anyone that isn't
> doing anything unethical - at least nothing anyone has mentioned points
> to the vendor blocking anything ethical.
..

Irrelevant argument and non sequitor.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 6:58:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

begin  trojan.vbs ... On Tuesday 30 August 2005 11:47 am, Leythos had this
to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

> In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
>> I apologize for the rant.
>>
>> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>
>> I have made my decision
>>
>> Vista I will not be buying.
>>
>> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>>
>> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>
>> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>
> So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
> media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
> in any way?
>
That is correct. Since when is the OS vendor supposed to police other
vendor's copyrights? The OS vendor is not the court system nor the police
force ... at least not yet, although I'm sure MickeyMouse is working on
taking over the state.


--
Have you been MicroShafted today?
To mess up a Linux box, you need to work *at* it.
To mess up a Windows box, you need to work *on* it.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 11:19:03 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I read the article and it was quite depressing. Should an OS maker be
"that" involved in "law enforcement?
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 12:41:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
<davids@webmaster.com> wrote:

> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
>more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
>keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

Thank you David. That is exactly my point.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 2:22:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7edae1c6a8e429989dd8@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

> In article <df310r$4pq$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
> says...

>> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
>> himself
>> more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
>> keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

> But the vendor isn't doing anything that would impact anyone that isn't
> doing anything unethical - at least nothing anyone has mentioned points
> to the vendor blocking anything ethical.

That may be the vendor's claim, but not only would we have to trust the
vendor, but it is manifestly clear that this simply isn't true. One of the
big things you're missing is that the OS vendor doesn't set the policy. The
OS vendor writes the code that enforces the policy, but the policy is set by
the content providers. (The people sending you advanced fee fraud scam
emails.)

DS
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 2:24:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7edb5649ee2a53989dd9@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <df315l$4ps$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
> says...
>>
>> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
>> news:MPG.1d7e8dd6ef6522b2989dd4@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
>>
>> > There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you
>> > can
>> > copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area
>> > reserved
>> > on your drive?
>> >
>> > Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.
>>
>> Suppose a virus or other piece of malware managed to protect itself
>> such
>> that I could not copy it. That would mean that I could not send it to an
>> expert for analysis or copy it onto another uninfected machine myself to
>> figure out how to disentangle it from my system.
>
> It doesn't say that it will block access to files at the kernel layer,
> only that you won't be able to pirate them - why would you assume that
> virus scanners and such won't find them or that you can't delete them.

It is already difficult to delete some viruses and malware. Being unable
to copy them (so that they can be analyzed on a clean machine or sent to an
expert) could definitely make things much harder.

DS
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 2:55:23 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

MS is not the only one that's going to have a problem with China. Due to
the fact that we have now taught the Chinese how to build everything for us,
and we have a huge trade imbalance to show for that, not to mention their
already huge and very rapidly growing military strength, and their coziness
with Russia of late, my thoughts are that we should all be more concerned
about our own tails, and not worry so much about microsoft's behind.


"beamish" <beamish@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9AE20570-3250-4010-BF1C-89AE94D72490@microsoft.com...
| Hello, Thanks for the information.
| Certain people do not understand the erosion of basic rights. No matter
what
| they state they "just don't get it".
| Microsoft may have future problems but not with file sharing or copying in
| the U.S. or Europe. Their problem will be with China, India and Google.
| take care.
| beamish.
|
| "GregRo" wrote:
|
| > I apologize for the rant.
| >
| > http://snipurl.com/hbl7
| >
| > I have made my decision
| >
| > Vista I will not be buying.
| >
| > No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
| > computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
| > got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
| >
| > I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
| >
| > If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
| >
| > Greg Ro
| >
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 5:10:05 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Rock" <rock@mail.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:eLaIwUdrFHA.1252@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> GregRo wrote:
>
>> I apologize for the rant.
>>
>> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
>>
>> I have made my decision Vista I will not be buying.
>>
>> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
>> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
>> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
>>
>> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
>>
>> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
>>
>> Greg Ro
>
> Who cares what you do - stick or don't stick - who cares.
>
> --
> Spock
> MS MVP Windows - Shell/User
>

No one, but then again

Who cares what you do - care or don't care - who cares.

Quite ironic Spock.

- Winux P
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 8:07:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <3nlq5tF24h70U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
> <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
>
> > That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
> >more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
> >keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.
>
> Thank you David. That is exactly my point.

While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
significant issues with it.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 8:07:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Leythos wrote:
> In article <3nlq5tF24h70U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
> says...
>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
>> <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
>>> himself more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who
>>> should have the keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses
>>> himself. I would too.
>>
>> Thank you David. That is exactly my point.
>
> While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
> installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
> that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
> significant issues with it.

LOL! When it screws up, as all usage-limiting technology does, it will
impact those that haven't violated any law. True pirates will get
around it, only law-abiding people will get screwed.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 8:07:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7f9ff7fd75877b989ddd@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

> While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
> installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
> that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
> significant issues with it.

Tell me, how can a computer tell what is fair use and what is not? Are
you for real?

DS
August 31, 2005 10:22:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7f9ff7fd75877b989ddd@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <3nlq5tF24h70U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
>> <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
>>
>> > That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
>> > himself
>> >more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have
>> >the
>> >keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.
>>
>> Thank you David. That is exactly my point.
>
> While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
> installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
> that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
> significant issues with it.
>

Not the point. The point is MS has NO BUSINESS being a copyright cop.
'Course, this fits right in with the principles behind PA and WGA: assuming
paying customers are thieves. So, this will prevent someone from sharing
some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying any
more than it prevented them from pirating XP.

Alias
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 10:22:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <#hu2igkrFHA.3440@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
maskedandanonymous.org says...
> So, this will prevent someone from sharing
> some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying any
> more than it prevented them from pirating XP.

I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
"sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....

I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
kids.


--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 10:22:09 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7fa6f1d723731f989de0@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

> In article <#hu2igkrFHA.3440@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
> maskedandanonymous.org says...

>> So, this will prevent someone from sharing
>> some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying
>> any
>> more than it prevented them from pirating XP.

> I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
> "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....

> I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
> licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
> kids.

I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly obvious
to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
The second is clearly illegal.

If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
illegal is quite meaningless, no?

DS
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 10:22:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <df4p95$oo9$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
says...
> > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
> > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....
>
> > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
> > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
> > kids.
>
> I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly obvious
> to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
> The second is clearly illegal.

Actually, I see the difference, but I disagree that there is a "real"
difference. I don't see any "real" difference between two kids making
copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other and a pirate making a
copy and selling it to anyone. In both cases there was an unpaid for
copy entering the market.

> If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
> conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
> illegal is quite meaningless, no?

But I do understand your position, I just don't see it in "degrees" of
being legal or not - making a copy for a friend is just as much illegal
as is selling a copy. If the software blocks it, more power to it, as
long as the software doesn't keep me from playing while doing so
according to the sellers rules. Software won't prevent it, as others
have mentioned, it will just make it harder for the "casual" thief to do
it, which means that less people will become thieves.


--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 10:22:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7fb56feef9754d989de6@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

> In article <df4p95$oo9$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
> says...

>> > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
>> > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....

>> > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
>> > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
>> > kids.

>> I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly
>> obvious
>> to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
>> The second is clearly illegal.

> Actually, I see the difference, but I disagree that there is a "real"
> difference. I don't see any "real" difference between two kids making
> copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other and a pirate making a
> copy and selling it to anyone. In both cases there was an unpaid for
> copy entering the market.

The two kids making copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other
could be an example of legally permissible fair use. For example, the second
copy could be for a legitimate research purpose or for nonprofit educational
purposes.

It's exactly because it is hard to tell the real difference between
these two cases that it's impossible for an automated mechanism to prevent
only illegal copying.

>> If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
>> conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
>> illegal is quite meaningless, no?

> But I do understand your position, I just don't see it in "degrees" of
> being legal or not - making a copy for a friend is just as much illegal
> as is selling a copy.

If you are making a copy for a friend to use for a nonprofit research
purpose, it's not illegal. There are no degrees of legal or not, fair use is
legal, period.

> If the software blocks it, more power to it, as
> long as the software doesn't keep me from playing while doing so
> according to the sellers rules. Software won't prevent it, as others
> have mentioned, it will just make it harder for the "casual" thief to do
> it, which means that less people will become thieves.

So it is now your position that it the software will block some legal
activity and that this is perfectly fine with you? That is not the position
you took previously.

DS
August 31, 2005 10:46:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7fa6f1d723731f989de0@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <#hu2igkrFHA.3440@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
> maskedandanonymous.org says...
>> So, this will prevent someone from sharing
>> some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying
>> any
>> more than it prevented them from pirating XP.
>
> I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
> "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....
>
> I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
> licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
> kids.

You don't know the difference between sharing and selling? Why am I not
surprised?

The cassette tape did not mean the end to the music companies. The video
cassette did not mean the end to Hollywood. MS made BILLIONS with Win 9x and
W2K even though they could be casually copied.

You are wrong, Leythos, your patronizing and phony morality notwithstanding.

The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.

Alias
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 10:46:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <eV5o#tkrFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
maskedandanonymous.org says...
> The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
> pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.

tell that to the hundreds of girls in the Sororities that swap songs and
such that don't pay for them.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 10:46:11 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Alias wrote:
>
> The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
> pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.

Why does this sound like the old gun control argument?

eg crooks dont buy guns from legit stores but get them anyway and
continue to use them.
A law abiding citizen has to jump through many hoops to get a gun for
his hobby tho.
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 11:10:28 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <4315fd61$0$200$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>, |@|.| says...
> Alias wrote:
> >
> > The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
> > pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
>
> Why does this sound like the old gun control argument?
>
> eg crooks dont buy guns from legit stores but get them anyway and
> continue to use them.
> A law abiding citizen has to jump through many hoops to get a gun for
> his hobby tho.

Funny, I bought a couple rifles and only had to complete a simple form,
wait about 6 minutes, and was able to walk out the door with it - but, I
also don't have anything in my background that would limit me from
purchasing a gun legally.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 11:10:29 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

Actually the ones it will affect are the small computer stores that built a
whole buch of computers, but only one copy of XP which they put on all of
the computers. When I came back to complain about not having an XP disk,
they tried to give me a copy they had made. I yelled enough that I got a
retail copy from them, but never got around to installing it since it seemed
to work okay. Of course I eventually got caught and had to install the
legal version. I went back to the store and he tried to tell me he was
'allowed' to do what he did.

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7fcabf62d6f296989def@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <4315fd61$0$200$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>, |@|.| says...
>> Alias wrote:
>> >
>> > The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The
>> > real
>> > pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
>>
>> Why does this sound like the old gun control argument?
>>
>> eg crooks dont buy guns from legit stores but get them anyway and
>> continue to use them.
>> A law abiding citizen has to jump through many hoops to get a gun for
>> his hobby tho.
>
> Funny, I bought a couple rifles and only had to complete a simple form,
> wait about 6 minutes, and was able to walk out the door with it - but, I
> also don't have anything in my background that would limit me from
> purchasing a gun legally.
>
> --
>
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
August 31, 2005 11:33:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote

> In article <eV5o#tkrFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
> maskedandanonymous.org says...
>> The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
>> pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
>
> tell that to the hundreds of girls in the Sororities that swap songs and
> such that don't pay for them.

So what? It was done with cassette tapes and the music industry still made
trillions of dollars. I was copying songs off the radio back with reel to
reel tapes in the early 60s and the music industry didn't go belly up. As
one poster said, one can use the out jack from one's audio card to connect
to a tape recorder and record off the internet radio or a cd. There's a
difference between sharing music and selling music. How come you didn't
address that?

Alias
Anonymous
August 31, 2005 11:33:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

In article <e97kXIlrFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
maskedandanonymous.org says...
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote
>
> > In article <eV5o#tkrFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
> > maskedandanonymous.org says...
> >> The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
> >> pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
> >
> > tell that to the hundreds of girls in the Sororities that swap songs and
> > such that don't pay for them.
>
> So what? It was done with cassette tapes and the music industry still made
> trillions of dollars. I was copying songs off the radio back with reel to
> reel tapes in the early 60s and the music industry didn't go belly up. As
> one poster said, one can use the out jack from one's audio card to connect
> to a tape recorder and record off the internet radio or a cd. There's a
> difference between sharing music and selling music. How come you didn't
> address that?

Because it has nothing to do with Vista. Just because you "can do"
something doesn't mean it's legit.

--

spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
August 31, 2005 11:44:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7fb56feef9754d989de6@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <df4p95$oo9$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
> says...
>> > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
>> > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....
>>
>> > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
>> > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
>> > kids.
>>
>> I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly
>> obvious
>> to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
>> The second is clearly illegal.
>
> Actually, I see the difference, but I disagree that there is a "real"
> difference. I don't see any "real" difference between two kids making
> copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other and a pirate making a
> copy and selling it to anyone. In both cases there was an unpaid for
> copy entering the market.
>
>> If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
>> conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
>> illegal is quite meaningless, no?
>
> But I do understand your position, I just don't see it in "degrees" of
> being legal or not - making a copy for a friend is just as much illegal
> as is selling a copy. If the software blocks it, more power to it, as
> long as the software doesn't keep me from playing while doing so
> according to the sellers rules. Software won't prevent it, as others
> have mentioned, it will just make it harder for the "casual" thief to do
> it, which means that less people will become thieves.

Sharer: does it to be nice.

Seller: does it to make money.

You still don't see the difference?

MS still has no business being a copyright cop. That's the business of the
legal system, not a software company. I will be curious to see how Europe
reacts to this and I am hoping that we will have a legal version of Vista,
not the illegal one you love so much.

Last I checked, it is illegal to pass oneself off as a cop and that's what
Vista will be doing. Course, you won't have a problem with that because MS
can do no wrong as far as you're concerned.

Alias
!