The End of m.p.s.v.
in [Windows Viruses]
|
From: MEB on 29 May 2010 16:37 On 05/29/2010 04:28 PM, MEB wrote: > On 05/29/2010 04:11 PM, FromTheRafters wrote: >> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:eQFdWR2$KHA.5848(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> >> [...] >> >> Usenet is not a site, and its content is not Microsoft's property. >> >> > > But anything IN Usenet/use net/usenet it obtained elsewhere [which it > does own, control, and otherwise, is NOT its property. So again, a > useless claim. Microsoft OWNS its groups, the hierarchy, and the > presentation as so stated BY Microsoft. > Sorry, should proof read these: which it does NOT control,.. -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking http://peoplescounsel.org The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government ___---
From: Geoff on 29 May 2010 16:53 On Sat, 29 May 2010 15:22:52 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote: [snip] completely irrelevant and unfathomable gibberish about copyright on his web site content. The prima fascia truth is that Microsoft gave up any copyright on content of their news servers when they created them as part of Usenet and that content was disseminated and copied by the peering news servers all over the globe. They can make no ex post facto claims on such content after many years of dissemination of that content. They can only terminate their news server functions and not accept any new articles from Usenet from those groups that were created many years ago. They can do what they want with their property (their servers) but they have no right to dictate what others do with their own property (the Usenet community at large). In future, they can claim to "own" content on their web forums but copyright cannot be forfeit by the authors of the content regardless of any TOS/TOU. Microsoft cannot own the content they didn't author themselves, only the presentation of that content. There is simply no contract when there is no agreement, performance and consideration. As a Microsoft shareholder, I would consider suing Microsoft if they were to pursue any recourse along the lines of enforcing their specious TOS/TOU as a waste of money and resources and a breach of fiduciary duty to the shareholders. An author's works are copyright at the moment of creation. Such copyright cannot be assigned without his/her specific and explicit agreement. TOS/TOU agreements are unenforceable. As an author of any writing along the topics encompassed by the Microsoft newsgroups, I would consider taking action against any company claiming to "own" those works and making money with them without paying me a consideration. (Theft and copyright infringement.) I won't be posting much on Microsoft's forums unless it interests me to do so or I know it will be freely available to others on those forums. I will continue to use these groups as freely available resources as long as they continue to exist.
From: MEB on 29 May 2010 17:02 On 05/29/2010 04:53 PM, Geoff wrote: > On Sat, 29 May 2010 15:22:52 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> > wrote: > > [snip] completely irrelevant and unfathomable gibberish about > copyright on his web site content. > > The prima fascia truth is that Microsoft gave up any copyright on > content of their news servers when they created them as part of Usenet Wrong. Microsoft never GAVE UP anything. Your purported arguments have no worth, value or merit. Microsoft never "created them as part of Usenet". -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking http://peoplescounsel.org The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government ___---
From: Geoff on 29 May 2010 17:22 On Sat, 29 May 2010 17:02:18 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On 05/29/2010 04:53 PM, Geoff wrote: >> On Sat, 29 May 2010 15:22:52 -0400, MEB <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> [snip] completely irrelevant and unfathomable gibberish about >> copyright on his web site content. >> >> The prima fascia truth is that Microsoft gave up any copyright on >> content of their news servers when they created them as part of Usenet > > Wrong. Microsoft never GAVE UP anything. Your purported arguments have >no worth, value or merit. > > Microsoft never "created them as part of Usenet". Yes, they did so by creating an NNTP server for the purpose. The also accepted peerage of other NNTP servers. The groups were not private to the Microsoft servers. The content of such groups, except where posts were created by Microsoft employees while on working hours, was not the property of Microsoft. QED If, in fact, you are a lawyer, you must not be a very successful one. You seem to have time to post useless arguments about Microsoft's rights but can't be bothered to pay court fees in Brahier vs. Bonini.
From: David H. Lipman on 29 May 2010 17:34
From: "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> >> No, not true at all! >> Take the Adobe.* hierarchy. Adobe did they same thing to Usenet more thn a year ago. >> First Adobe made it a unidirectional feed to Usenet. Then in 2009 they cut all ties >> to >> Usenet. Yet, the Adobe.* Usenet hierachy lives on. | Not a good argument. | What Adobe did has no relevance to what Microsoft does and has done, | which includes the legal notice to close these groups. THAT and | Microsoft's documents and applicable Law are what control this/these | issues, and the Law and Microsoft say close the groups Microsoft OWNS. No. When Microsoft connected to Usenet and "peered" they have no ownership of the groups. Usenet at large is public and not privately held. Microsoft, on the other hand, owns their Forums. -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp |