[RC5] continuation?

Ryan Malayter rmalayter at bai.org
Fri Mar 22 09:43:44 EST 2002


Who'd you buy the PC from? All the major manufacturers have their PCs boot
into the license agreement out of the box, then you key in your serial
number and off you go.
 
Perhaps you bought a "white box"? Sometimes these manufacturers don't follow
MS's guidelines for reselling Windows on a preinstalled (or they resell
pirated software, either intentionally or unwittingly).
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthanc [mailto:orthanc_duo at hotmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 5:01 PM
To: rc5 at lists.distributed.net
Subject: Re: [RC5] continuation?


Last time I bought a comp with windows pre-installed there was no Licence
aggreement the first time I booted the computer, nor was there any
docmentation saying that by using this computer I agree to the licence
conditions. This seems obvious to me but I wonder how it would stand up in a
law court.
 
Orthanc
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jason Hartzell <mailto:jhartzell at arcataassoc.com>  
To: 'rc5 at lists.distributed.net' <mailto:'rc5 at lists.distributed.net'>  
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 10:11 AM
Subject: RE: [RC5] continuation?

Maybe if you have a windows OS with MS Office on your computer w/o find fast
and MS broke into your house or used an open internet connection and
installed it behind your back. Maybe then....but since that has NEVER
happened......
 
Users and Administrators install the Windows OS and Office Suite on their
own. Of their own free will, on computers that they own or have legal
control over. It really is that simple. They have read the licencse
agreement (if they haven't they get no sympathy). Even if they buy the PC
with the OS and Office Suite pre-installed they still fall under the same
usage guidlines, and the same license agreements. They know what they got.
At least in this case usage implies agreement and understanding. 
 
I don't see how that can be equated to someone stealing processor time via
unauthorized access to a PC.
-----Original Message-----
From: Justin Hernandez [mailto:justin.hernandez at timedomain.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 7:58 AM
To: 'rc5 at lists.distributed.net'
Subject: [RC5] continuation?


on a semi related note, 
does this make a precedence for prosecuting microsoft for such things as
"find fast"?
something that generally installs without the user's knowledge, runs in the
background, starts up your hard drive and spins it up at the most
innoportune times, and does nothing to increase performance?
 
valis
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul West [mailto:PaulW at paulw.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 9:53 PM
To: 'rc5 at lists.distributed.net'
Subject: RE: [RC5] Service Pause Option


Tell that to the people in Jail, or to those that have been expelled from
colleges,  or those that lost their jobs because they ran the client without
getting permission.
 
--
Paul West
(425) 308-3783 (Voice)
(425) 740-0216 (eFax)
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Justin Hernandez [mailto:justin.hernandez at timedomain.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 11:15 AM
To: 'rc5 at lists.distributed.net'
Subject: RE: [RC5] Service Pause Option
 
but how did he steal cpu time? 
this cpu time would have gone completely wasted, "stolen" by idle processes
and not being used at all.  i'm trying to think of a good analogy.
i have some headphones on my desk. 
if when i'm not using them, someone comes and borrows it, but the second i
want to use them, they bring them back without me even ASKING, has that
person "stolen" my headphones?
i call that borrowing when not needed, not stealing 
valis 
-----Original Message----- 
From: Scott Christopher Dodson [mailto:gsi22419 at gsaix2.cc.gasou.edu
<mailto:gsi22419 at gsaix2.cc.gasou.edu> ] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 10:52 AM 
To: rc5 at lists.distributed.net 
Subject: RE: [RC5] Service Pause Option 
 
> We also came under heavy criticism recently for not contributing to 
> the defense of one of our participants who apparently installed the 
> client without permission of the owners of those machines.  (see 
> http://www.freemccowan.org <http://www.freemccowan.org> , if I have the
URL right).  Whatever your 
> opinion of the scale of the charges against him, our handling of this 
> situation was fully consistent with our stated policy. 
 
The appropriate link is : http://www.freemcowen.com/
<http://www.freemcowen.com/>  I've talked to him 
before and perhaps the most concerning issue is the fact that he seems to 
believe that there was no wrong committed.  I don't understand why fail to 
see that stolen cpu time is the same as stolen physical material.  You pay 
big bucks for faster cpus, it should be obvious that you're paying for cpu 
processing power. 
-- 
scott 
-- 
To unsubscribe, send 'unsubscribe rc5' to majordomo at lists.distributed.net 
rc5-digest subscribers replace rc5 with rc5-digest 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.distributed.net/pipermail/rc5/attachments/20020322/ad5680aa/attachment-0001.htm


More information about the rc5 mailing list