Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

~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?

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

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.

[Guest James Hahn]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Please see my comments in-line.

 

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BF303F.1043D2CE@Guy.com...

> 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.

>

 

There is no counter-argument to anyone who simply says "I think it ought to

be different than it is because that seems more sensible to me" which is the

sum total of the arguments you have put forward. You have not addressed any

of the points that have been part of the whole process of the establishment

of copyright protection across a wide range of jurisdictions over many

years. Provide one reason why you believe the original creator of a

copyrightable work is not entitled to protect that work from copying, and

maybe people will attempt to provide the evidence to disprove it. Don't just

say "because I can't see any reason" - you can't see any reason because you

haven't done the research. Unless you are prepared to say just how you can

dismiss all the argument and evidence about the value to the community that

derives from the ability to protect creative works, then there is no

argument to counter. But you can't do that because you do not understand

copyright, because you have not done the research.

> 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.

>

 

That's not how it works. You are suggesting that a broad set of laws can

either be ignored or should be changed because you don't think they are

appropriate for today's information-based environment. The onus is on you

to show why things are now so different from what they were when the

copyright laws were debated and refined in the legislative chambers and

courts throughout the world that these changes should now be made. When the

process by which the current laws were created is examined (which you seem

determined not to do) you will realize that there is a vast amount of

material addressing each specific point of copyright law, and the debate in

respect of when and how copyright should terminate is as extensive as any

other part. When you have determnined exactly which parts of those

arguments are no longer valid, then present them here and shoot them down.

>> 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.

>

 

How about "How is Microsoft harmed, financially or otherwise, today, by

those that obtain and use Windows-98 by any means? What exactly is

copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit to Microsoft, with

regard to the casual circulation and use of Windows 98?"

 

That sure sounds to me like you are saying that the availability of

copyright protection should take into account the potential of the

rights-holder to profit from the product. And your following comments make

the same claim.

> A more rational copyright law could be structured as:

>

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

>

 

Copyright applies to a published creative work. If it isn't made public it

can't be copied and doesn't need copyright protection.

> 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.

>

 

If it's been made public it can't cease to be public. Once it's published

it's published forever.

> 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.

>

 

Why do we need something similar to a patent? Doesn't patent law look after

that situation? Copyright applies to creative works. Patent law applies to

inventions.

> 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.

>

 

Whether software should be patentable or copyrightable is a completely

different argument that also has a large body of discussion (and which no

doubt you also have not consulted) and is not going to be debated here.

> 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.

 

Once it's public it's public forever. What you really mean by "withdrawn

from public availability" is "no longer a commercial product". You have not

provided any argument to justify a reduction in the rights of the copyright

holder just because a copyrighted item ceases to be a commercial product. If

it is deserving of copyright protection when it first went on sale then it

is deserving of copyright protection for as long as the rights-holder

chooses. That's the determination of the settled body of copyright law and

you have not advanced any argument that suggests it ought to be otherwise.

[Guest Gary S. Terhune]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

You're talking to the MOST ignorant of the regulars in this group (well,

"regular" as in a couple of years, not like the *real* regulars here.) Been

proven over and over and over and over ad nauseum. If I had any thought for

his welfare, I'd take up a collection to pay for a tutor in Logic. It would

have to be a very substantial sum, I should think. Might even turn out to be

a lifetime's vocation, and I already have too many of those.

 

Hope you're aren't expecting anything resembling a real debate. And I

*really* hope you don't have some fantasy about teaching him anything,

whether factual or procedural. If you did.... Well, let's just say I'd have

to start being concerned for your own sanity.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://grystmill.com

 

"James Hahn" <jhahn@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:eNB6cskDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Please see my comments in-line.

>

> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BF303F.1043D2CE@Guy.com...

>> 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.

>>

>

> There is no counter-argument to anyone who simply says "I think it ought

> to be different than it is because that seems more sensible to me" which

> is the sum total of the arguments you have put forward. You have not

> addressed any of the points that have been part of the whole process of

> the establishment of copyright protection across a wide range of

> jurisdictions over many years. Provide one reason why you believe the

> original creator of a copyrightable work is not entitled to protect that

> work from copying, and maybe people will attempt to provide the evidence

> to disprove it. Don't just say "because I can't see any reason" - you

> can't see any reason because you haven't done the research. Unless you are

> prepared to say just how you can dismiss all the argument and evidence

> about the value to the community that derives from the ability to protect

> creative works, then there is no argument to counter. But you can't do

> that because you do not understand copyright, because you have not done

> the research.

>

>> 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.

>>

>

> That's not how it works. You are suggesting that a broad set of laws can

> either be ignored or should be changed because you don't think they are

> appropriate for today's information-based environment. The onus is on you

> to show why things are now so different from what they were when the

> copyright laws were debated and refined in the legislative chambers and

> courts throughout the world that these changes should now be made. When

> the process by which the current laws were created is examined (which you

> seem determined not to do) you will realize that there is a vast amount of

> material addressing each specific point of copyright law, and the debate

> in respect of when and how copyright should terminate is as extensive as

> any other part. When you have determnined exactly which parts of those

> arguments are no longer valid, then present them here and shoot them down.

>

>>> 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.

>>

>

> How about "How is Microsoft harmed, financially or otherwise, today, by

> those that obtain and use Windows-98 by any means? What exactly is

> copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit to Microsoft, with

> regard to the casual circulation and use of Windows 98?"

>

> That sure sounds to me like you are saying that the availability of

> copyright protection should take into account the potential of the

> rights-holder to profit from the product. And your following comments

> make the same claim.

>

>> A more rational copyright law could be structured as:

>>

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

>>

>

> Copyright applies to a published creative work. If it isn't made public it

> can't be copied and doesn't need copyright protection.

>

>> 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.

>>

>

> If it's been made public it can't cease to be public. Once it's published

> it's published forever.

>

>> 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.

>>

>

> Why do we need something similar to a patent? Doesn't patent law look

> after that situation? Copyright applies to creative works. Patent law

> applies to inventions.

>

>> 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.

>>

>

> Whether software should be patentable or copyrightable is a completely

> different argument that also has a large body of discussion (and which no

> doubt you also have not consulted) and is not going to be debated here.

>

>> 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.

>

> Once it's public it's public forever. What you really mean by "withdrawn

> from public availability" is "no longer a commercial product". You have

> not provided any argument to justify a reduction in the rights of the

> copyright holder just because a copyrighted item ceases to be a commercial

> product. If it is deserving of copyright protection when it first went on

> sale then it is deserving of copyright protection for as long as the

> rights-holder chooses. That's the determination of the settled body of

> copyright law and you have not advanced any argument that suggests it

> ought to be otherwise.

[Guest MEB]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

We did this before, read your BS from the last time:

 

http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ref/fedstat/copyright.htm

 

There is no argument you can raise that would allow the activity in which

you engage and solicit others to do.

 

--

MEB

a Peoples' counsel

--

_________

 

 

 

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BF3A09.E1E6D02@Guy.com...

| 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.

[Guest Dan]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

MEB, how come Microsoft does not sell the 9x source code to the U.S. or

Canadian or another friendly government if Microsoft is not willing to

program for the 9x source code anymore because it is too expensive for

Microsoft to program for 2 source codes from what I have read about the

situation. (Note: I feel and I think many here would agree with me that

Windows 9x consumer source code was best in Windows 98 Second Edition because

Windows ME removed easy access to MS-DOS and broke easy compatibility with

older programs --- heck --- Microsoft has a white page document that weighs

in over 100 pages on securing Windows 98 and Windows NT networks so it

certainly sounds like Microsoft cares a lot about their older IP that is

still in use by a few companies, some individuals and within some governments)

 

"MEB" wrote:

> We did this before, read your BS from the last time:

>

> http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ref/fedstat/copyright.htm

>

> There is no argument you can raise that would allow the activity in which

> you engage and solicit others to do.

>

> --

> MEB

> a Peoples' counsel

> --

> _________

>

>

>

> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BF3A09.E1E6D02@Guy.com...

> | 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.

>

>

>

[Guest MEB]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

 

 

"Dan" <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message

news:1E27A260-58C7-41CE-8C03-4C7A7F911E27@microsoft.com...

| MEB, how come Microsoft does not sell the 9x source code to the U.S. or

| Canadian or another friendly government if Microsoft is not willing to

| program for the 9x source code anymore because it is too expensive for

| Microsoft to program for 2 source codes from what I have read about the

| situation. (Note: I feel and I think many here would agree with me that

| Windows 9x consumer source code was best in Windows 98 Second Edition

because

| Windows ME removed easy access to MS-DOS and broke easy compatibility with

| older programs --- heck --- Microsoft has a white page document that

weighs

| in over 100 pages on securing Windows 98 and Windows NT networks so it

| certainly sounds like Microsoft cares a lot about their older IP that is

| still in use by a few companies, some individuals and within some

governments)

 

Microsoft has or had many white papers and other related to the networking

aspects < I still have many hundreds locally;, and is aware of the existance

of the millions of users. And in reality, its not all that expensive to

maintain it.. it just no longer brings in the revenue desired.

 

As for why Microsoft retains its authority; you would have to take that up

with Microsoft.

 

--

MEB

 

--

_________

[Guest Sunny]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

 

"MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:u9TRMLlDJHA.1224@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> We did this before, read your BS from the last time:

>

> http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ref/fedstat/copyright.htm

>

> There is no argument you can raise that would allow the activity in

> which

> you engage and solicit others to do.

>

> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BF3A09.E1E6D02@Guy.com...

<snip>

 

The ironic part about the whole thing is that Western piracy is peanuts,

compared to Asian practises.

 

On frequent trips, to Singapore/Malaysia/Indonesia I have noticed

thousands of OEM Win98-ME and XP CDs being openly sold off the shelf, in

shops. (Some shop keepers didn't know "retail" copies even existed)

Also, at a Microsoft promotion in Singapore, even the stall holders were

openly admitting pirating Microsoft stuff.

The largest thefts are from corporate/business systems.

[Guest James Hahn]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message

news:OqOxVKlDJHA.4696@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> You're talking to the MOST ignorant of the regulars in this group (well,

> "regular" as in a couple of years, not like the *real* regulars here.)

> Been proven over and over and over and over ad nauseum. If I had any

> thought for his welfare, I'd take up a collection to pay for a tutor in

> Logic. It would have to be a very substantial sum, I should think. Might

> even turn out to be a lifetime's vocation, and I already have too many of

> those.

>

> Hope you're aren't expecting anything resembling a real debate. And I

> *really* hope you don't have some fantasy about teaching him anything,

> whether factual or procedural. If you did.... Well, let's just say I'd

> have to start being concerned for your own sanity.

>

> --

> Gary S. Terhune

> MS-MVP Shell/User

> http://grystmill.com

>

 

Well, I did jump in by noting that it was the silliest argument I had seen

in a long time. I think I may have made the same mistake in this NG before,

but as a publisher of creative works it is a topic that I feel some concern

about.

[Guest ~BD~]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

 

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BF3086.54A0782C@Guy.com...

> ~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?

>

__________________________________________________

 

Consider this, wise Guy:-

 

The industrial revolution of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and the upsurge in

international commerce which followed resulted in the adoption of a number of international treaties

related to shipping, including safety. The subjects covered included tonnage measurement, the

prevention of collisions, signalling and others.

 

By the end of the nineteenth century suggestions had even been made for the creation of a permanent

international maritime body to deal with these and future measures. The plan was not put into

effect, but international co-operation continued in the twentieth century, with the adoption of

still more internationally-developed treaties.

 

By the time IMO came into existence in 1958, several important international conventions had already

been developed, including the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1948, the

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil of 1954 and treaties

dealing with load lines and the prevention of collisions at sea.

 

IMO was made responsible for ensuring that the majority of these conventions were kept up to date.

It was also given the task of developing new conventions as and when the need arose.

 

The creation of IMO coincided with a period of tremendous change in world shipping and the

Organization was kept busy from the start developing new conventions and ensuring that existing

instruments kept pace with changes in shipping technology. It is now responsible for nearly 50

international conventions and agreements and has adopted numerous protocols and amendments.

 

 

Extract from 'Conventions' here:- http://www.imo.org/

 

HTH

 

Dave

[Guest Angel]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Note Below

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

: 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!!!!

:

All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others AS

you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better world

if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of style.

Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your mind

set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do not

know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to University

classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

going to those classes.

 

Angel

 

: > "Buffalo" <Eric@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message

: > news:mPidnVvSDKOGYyDVnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d@comcast.com...

: >>

: >>

: >> 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.

:

:

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

James Hahn wrote:

> > Why don't you provide a counter-argument.

>

> There is no counter-argument to anyone who simply says "I think it

> ought to be different than it is because that seems more sensible

> to me"

 

I'm asking why should a work that is no longer and will never be made

available again require copyright protection?

 

Was copyright law written with that situation in mind?

> You have not addressed any of the points that have been part

> of the whole process of the establishment of copyright protection

 

I'm not saying that the concept of copyright protection has no logical

or rational basis.

 

I'm saying that society does not benefit from the enforcement of

perpetual copyright protection of a work that is no longer and will

never again be made available to the public by the owner of the work.

 

The concept of patent protection is more equitable for society in that

it gives the owner exclusive use of the patent for a fixed (but

relatively short) time frame. Through copyright law and the courts,

society conveys protection to the owner of copyrighted works, the

corollary being that society _should_ have access to the works if they

become abandoned by the owner, or at least should not be prosecuted for

simply replicating and distributing the works.

> Provide one reason why you believe the original creator of a

> copyrightable work is not entitled to protect that work from

> copying,

 

In the case of software, simple copying does not and should not

constitute a violation of copyright law, because unlike books or music

or movies or art, software can not be "experienced" unless it is used.

If I copy a book, the copy *is* the experience. Everyone here is hung

up on the copying aspect of the software distribution mechanism, which

logically can't be equated to the copying of other forms of creative

work.

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Full-Quoter and Top-poster MEB wrote:

> We did this before, read your BS from the last time:

 

No MEB. I want to read your response this time.

 

| 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?

 

Where is your response MEB?

 

Oh, that's right. I forgot.

 

You don't respond to straight forward questions by giving

straight-forward answers.

 

You operate in a cloud of fear that everything you type will and can be

held against you in a court of law.

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

~BD~ wrote:

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

> > better?

> Consider this, wise Guy:-

>

> (a brief explanation of maritime history and the origin of the "IMO")

 

Um, ok. That's nice.

 

Don't see what it has to do with what was being discussed.

[Guest 98 Guy]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Still waiting for a response to these points:

 

(A) Microsoft sells (or has sold) licenses to use Windows-98. As long

as every running installation of Windows-98 has a unique license (or in

most cases a product key) that is not shared or duplicated to any other

running installation, that nothing illegal or immoral is transpiring.

 

(B) Copying the Windows-98 CD or transmitting it to or receiving it

electronically from others should not be considered illegal or immoral.

Only the _use_ of Windows-98 (regardless of how it was obtained) should

be considered illegal or immoral if it runs counter to point (a) above.

 

Regardless if those points run counter to copyright law or what-ever

verbiage that microsoft has stamped on their CD's, the above 2 points

are equitable, logical and practical with respect to Microsoft and the

public in general.

[Guest Dan]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Thank you Sunny and if that is indeed a fact that "The largest thefts are

from corporate/business systems." then it makes me think that Microsoft chose

poorly by choosing to continue to develop Windows NT business source code and

just leave the consumers behind with abandoning the 9x consumer source code.

As I have said before the rest of this year will prove especially interesting

to see if Mozilla gives up support of Firefox 2 by the end of the year and

then users are stuck with Opera <shudder> or possibly some other 9x supported

browser for using the 'Web with the proper protections. I know I will have

my router up and going by then and wrap up my research into Windows 98 Second

Edition and using other browsers such as Mozilla Firefox and Opera with it.

I will indeed continue to use Windows 98 Second Edition in protest of the

establishment and for the ability to run old games that will not run on XP

and I feel the old-school games were lots of fun and really creative in their

making unlike so many newer games that focus mainly on special effects,

sounds and graphics to the detriment of the story. This is just my 2/3 cents

for what little it is worth.

 

"Sunny" wrote:

>

> "MEB" <meb@not here@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> news:u9TRMLlDJHA.1224@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> > We did this before, read your BS from the last time:

> >

> > http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ref/fedstat/copyright.htm

> >

> > There is no argument you can raise that would allow the activity in

> > which

> > you engage and solicit others to do.

> >

> > "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BF3A09.E1E6D02@Guy.com...

> <snip>

>

> The ironic part about the whole thing is that Western piracy is peanuts,

> compared to Asian practises.

>

> On frequent trips, to Singapore/Malaysia/Indonesia I have noticed

> thousands of OEM Win98-ME and XP CDs being openly sold off the shelf, in

> shops. (Some shop keepers didn't know "retail" copies even existed)

> Also, at a Microsoft promotion in Singapore, even the stall holders were

> openly admitting pirating Microsoft stuff.

> The largest thefts are from corporate/business systems.

>

>

>

[Guest MEB]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

 

Here you go again, same garbage, now with your infamous Top-poster dig you

use when your infantile activities fail...

 

These questions WERE answered before IN DETAIL. If your memory is so bad, I

have them preserved on the web page to which I directed you.

 

I will advise though, that the page and site may become non-existent as

there is a legal matter being attended to at the moment related to the site.

 

Want something legal to discuss which hasn't been already been discussed to

[relative] finality in this group and elsewhere, here it is.

It directly relates to copyrighted materials and personal property.

Moreover, does give the opportunity for discussions into the various legal

aspects involved, and you, personally, to show your expertise in the legal

arena and materials and activities thereto.

The first aspects were presented in this group under:

Subject: Re: Do NOT use these hosting services - FreeWebHostingArea.com and

Orgfree.com

 

Reference:

From: "Maurice Edward, Brahier"

To: <webmaster@orgfree.com>; <webmaster@orgfreemail.com>

Subject: Re: Official Notice - 15 days in which to respond

Date: Thursday, September 04, 2008 11:00 AM

 

You will provide the name, address, and telephone number of your legal

representative(s). Failure to comply will cause further action(s) related

thereto.

 

This is preliminary to legal action upon your service and you, personally,

as webmaster.

 

Maurice Edward, Brahier

 

 

Referenced messages:

 

Thu, 4 Sep 2008 09:31:48 -0500 (CDT)

Subject: Re: Official Notice - 15 days in which to respond

From: webmaster@orgfreemail.com

To: "Maurice Edward, Brahier"

User Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.13MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bitX-Priority: 3

(Normal)Importance: Normal

X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with

any abuse report

X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - titano.protonhosting.com

X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - hotmail.com

X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]

X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - orgfreemail.com

X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir:

Return-Path: webmaster@orgfreemail.com

X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Sep 2008 14:31:49.0460 (UTC)

FILETIME=[F75D2940:01C90E9A]

 

 

When you register an account you must agree to our terms located at:

http://www.freewebhostingarea.com/agreement.html

According to them you have absolutely no rights here.

For your offending emails and for your defamatory actions our conversation

ends HERE.

==========================

By submitting a web page to FreeWebHostingArea.com or any other web page

hosting service on our network, you grant FreeWebHostingArea.com a

royalty-free, nonexclusive, worldwide, unrestricted license to use, copy,

transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, create compilations including,

and distribute such web page, and any associated Content, for the limited

purposes of publishing and promoting the user's web page in connection with

the particular service with which the user has chosen to have the web page

hosted and for publishing and promoting such web page elsewhere within the

FreeWebHostingArea.com Network. Such license shall apply with respect to any

form, media, or technology now known or later developed. This term will

extend only for the duration of the user's membership with the particular

FreeWebHostingArea.com service. In the event that such membership is

terminated, FreeWebHostingArea.com will relinquish all rights to the user's

content following the duration of any applicable promotional activities

ongoing at the time the membership is terminated.

We reserve the right to suspend or delete ANY site due to inappropriate

behavior at our sole discretion.

===================================

>

>

> DATE:

> 2008/09/04

> Time:

> 03:06 A.M. GMT-5 EDT

>

>

> It appears you have blocked access to my personal property and

> copyrighted materials.

>

> I have tried both the FTP and HTTP access.

>

> I have also noted you have openly and publicly defaced my personal and

> copyrighted property.

>

> The materials on the site, for the most part, are also Official documents

> from and in American courts and government Offices and Agencies, and fall

> under the protections of the U.S. and International Laws and governments.

>

> You will supply access to the materials within 15 days, or I will proceed

> accordingly. The matters fall under both U.S. and International Laws, and

> may be address both here in the U.S.A. and in your Nation concurrently.

>

> Maurice Edward, Brahier

 

--

MEB

a Peoples' counsel

--

_________

 

 

 

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BFEC54.B743C8A0@Guy.com...

| Full-Quoter and Top-poster MEB wrote:

|

| > We did this before, read your BS from the last time:

|

| No MEB. I want to read your response this time.

|

| | 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?

|

| Where is your response MEB?

|

| Oh, that's right. I forgot.

|

| You don't respond to straight forward questions by giving

| straight-forward answers.

|

| You operate in a cloud of fear that everything you type will and can be

| held against you in a court of law.

[Guest ~BD~]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

 

"Angel" <angel@noway.com> wrote in message news:uxZuhZpDJHA.232@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> Note Below

> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

> news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> : "scruples, morality and integrity"??? Wrong era and wrong generation

> for

> : that! You old fogie, you!!!!

> :

> All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others AS

> you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better world

> if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

> NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of style.

> Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your mind

> set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do not

> know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to University

> classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

> going to those classes.

>

> Angel

>

 

Hi Angel :)

 

I think Bill was having a little joke with you!

 

Maybe he, too, has been to the University of Life!

 

In which case, I suspect that his standards are much like yours ....... and mine! <smile>

 

Dave

 

--

[Guest Angel]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Bill in Co.

 

Correction: Note below YOUR comment.

 

Angel

 

"Angel" <angel@noway.com> wrote in message

news:uxZuhZpDJHA.232@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

: Note Below

: "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

: news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

: : 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!!!!

: :

: All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others AS

: you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better

world

: if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

: NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of

style.

: Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your

mind

: set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do not

: know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to

University

: classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

: going to those classes.

:

: Angel

:

: : > "Buffalo" <Eric@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message

: : > news:mPidnVvSDKOGYyDVnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d@comcast.com...

: : >>

: : >>

: : >> 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.

: :

: :

:

:

[Guest Bill in Co.]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

~BD~ wrote:

> "Angel" <angel@noway.com> wrote in message

> news:uxZuhZpDJHA.232@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>> Note Below

>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

>> news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>> "scruples, morality and integrity"??? Wrong era and wrong generation

>>> for that! You old fogie, you!!!!

>>>

>> All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others AS

>> you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better

>> world

>> if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

>> NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of

>> style.

>> Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your

>> mind

>> set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do

>> not

>> know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to

>> University

>> classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

>> going to those classes.

>>

>> Angel

>>

>

> Hi Angel :)

>

> I think Bill was having a little joke with you!

>

> Maybe he, too, has been to the University of Life!

>

> In which case, I suspect that his standards are much like yours .......

> and

> mine! <smile>

> Dave

 

 

Right. Apparently my attempt at sarcasm was too subtle. :-)

[Guest Bill in Co.]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Apparently my attempt at sarcasm was too subtle. :-)

 

Angel wrote:

> Bill in Co.

>

> Correction: Note below YOUR comment.

>

> Angel

>

> "Angel" <angel@noway.com> wrote in message

> news:uxZuhZpDJHA.232@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>> Note Below

>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

>> news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

>>> 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!!!!

>>>

>> All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others AS

>> you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better

>> world

>> if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

>> NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of

>> style.

>> Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your

>> mind

>> set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do

>> not

>> know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to

>> University

>> classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

>> going to those classes.

>>

>> Angel

>>

>>>> "Buffalo" <Eric@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message

>>>> news:mPidnVvSDKOGYyDVnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d@comcast.com...

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> 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.

[Guest Angel]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Hi Dave,

 

This University is a "____State University" where I and other students go

for an education. In fact, right now, I am with other students that are

studying to become teachers, It is a 40000 & 50000 class. It is not the

"University of Life". This is in addition to "The University of Life".

Just setting the record straight.

 

Angel

 

"~BD~" <BoaterDave@nospam.invalid> wrote in message

news:usNyOWrDJHA.2612@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

:

: "Angel" <angel@noway.com> wrote in message

news:uxZuhZpDJHA.232@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

: > Note Below

: > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

: > news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

: > : "scruples, morality and integrity"??? Wrong era and wrong

generation

: > for

: > : that! You old fogie, you!!!!

: > :

: > All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others

AS

: > you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better

world

: > if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

: > NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of

style.

: > Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your

mind

: > set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do

not

: > know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to

University

: > classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

: > going to those classes.

: >

: > Angel

: >

:

: Hi Angel :)

:

: I think Bill was having a little joke with you!

:

: Maybe he, too, has been to the University of Life!

:

: In which case, I suspect that his standards are much like yours .......

and mine! <smile>

:

: Dave

:

: --

:

:

[Guest Angel]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Hi Dave,

 

This University is a "____State University" where I and other students go

for an education. In fact, right now, I am with other students that are

studying to become teachers, It is a 40000 & 50000 class. It is not the

"University of Life". This is in addition to "The University of Life".

Just setting the record straight.

 

Angel

 

"~BD~" <BoaterDave@nospam.invalid> wrote in message

news:usNyOWrDJHA.2612@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

:

: "Angel" <angel@noway.com> wrote in message

news:uxZuhZpDJHA.232@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

: > Note Below

: > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

: > news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

: > : "scruples, morality and integrity"??? Wrong era and wrong

generation

: > for

: > : that! You old fogie, you!!!!

: > :

: > All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others

AS

: > you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better

world

: > if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

: > NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of

style.

: > Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your

mind

: > set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do

not

: > know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to

University

: > classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

: > going to those classes.

: >

: > Angel

: >

:

: Hi Angel :)

:

: I think Bill was having a little joke with you!

:

: Maybe he, too, has been to the University of Life!

:

: In which case, I suspect that his standards are much like yours .......

and mine! <smile>

:

: Dave

:

: --

:

:

[Guest Angel]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

No, it wasn't.

 

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

news:%23QTnBerDJHA.3576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

: Apparently my attempt at sarcasm was too subtle. :-)

:

: Angel wrote:

: > Bill in Co.

: >

: > Correction: Note below YOUR comment.

: >

: > Angel

: >

: > "Angel" <angel@noway.com> wrote in message

: > news:uxZuhZpDJHA.232@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

: >> Note Below

: >> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message

: >> news:O5ksSUhDJHA.3432@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

: >>> 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!!!!

: >>>

: >> All I have to say about your comment is: Do, Write and Say unto others

AS

: >> you would want them to Do, Write and Say to you. It would be a better

: >> world

: >> if everyone believed and did this. Scruples, morality and integrity has

: >> NEVER been connected with era or generation. It has never gone out of

: >> style.

: >> Of course, there is nothing that would change your mind if you had your

: >> mind

: >> set on "wrong era and wrong generation" no matter what. Anyway, you do

: >> not

: >> know what generation I am from, this may give you a hint: I go to

: >> University

: >> classes. Right now, I am taking Philosophy classes. Maybe you should be

: >> going to those classes.

: >>

: >> Angel

: >>

: >>>> "Buffalo" <Eric@nada.com.invalid> wrote in message

: >>>> news:mPidnVvSDKOGYyDVnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d@comcast.com...

: >>>>>

: >>>>>

: >>>>> 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.

:

:

[Guest Buffalo]

Re: Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

 

 

 

Bill in Co. wrote:

> Apparently my attempt at sarcasm was too subtle. :-)

 

No question about it.