Worries About Stealing, etc
in [Windows Viruses]
|
From: David H. Lipman on 11 Apr 2010 15:18 From: "Virus Guy" <Virus(a)Guy.com> "His" reply to you is a complete lie! That's why the following was placed in RogueFix and other non-public ones as well. Stuart Suanders is not alone. He is one of MANY victims of the salacitious code thief, Public Marker #1 --------------------- :S949n IF EXIST "%UserProfile%\application data\seilhturtlaereht.inf" seilhturtlaereht.inf ==> Drop the .INF seilhturtlaereht ==> theealtruthlies Public Marker #2 --------------------- IF EXIST "%UserProfile%\local settings\temp\obatssrsghde.exe" echo "%UserProfile%\local settings\temp\obatssrsghde.exe" IF EXIST "%UserProfile%\local settings\temp\obatssrsghde.exe" echo "%UserProfile%\local settings\temp\obatssrsghde.exe">>remove-it.txt The file; "%UserProfile%\local settings\temp\obatssrsghde.exe" is a fabrication. It does not exist. It, obatssrsghde.exe, is actually a file name in code. obatssrsghde.exe ==> drop .EXE obatssrsghde increase character by 1 ==> pcbuttsthief -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
From: JD on 11 Apr 2010 15:38 Virus Guy wrote: > MEB wrote: > >>> If their names are already public knowledge (either in the "help - >>> about" section of the software, or in PTO or legal copyright >>> documents, or on the website that hosts the software) then you >>> should have no problem stating the author names as I request in >>> your next reply to me. >> >> Stating specific names is not necessary nor required by Law >> anywhere, > > I never said that it was. > > I'm simply asking who is the other claimed author of this contentious > code. > > Most of this thread deals with the injustice or harm that comes from > stealing or using other people's code without giving proper attribution > or recognition. > > So I'm asking who exactly should be given that attribution or > recognition *if* indeed we are dealing with improper code usage. Here is the real truth: The Real Truth MVP is not listed on the MVP list: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/ The web page http://www.ms-mvp.org/ uses Godaddy's stealth frame-redirection to redirect you to: http://pcbutts1.com/downloads/tools/tools.htm Check out �pcbutts� using your favorite search engine. Can you really trust someone like this? Do you really want to download his software and/or follow his advice? The guy now says he's a woman, well two different women: http://tekrider.net/usenet/pcbutts.php Virusguy, what is the point you're trying to make? Surely you're not trying to convince this newsgroup that PC Butts is actually a person to be trusted? I doubt you'll agree to anything you see here so don't bother replying to me because I'm not going to play your little game anymore. Run some of Butts software, lots of luck! 8-) -- JD..
From: "FromTheRafters" erratic on 11 Apr 2010 18:50 "Virus Guy" <Virus(a)Guy.com> wrote in message news:4BC20F8D.2C759F60(a)Guy.com... > I can only assume that since nobody else has bothered to post the > names > of these authors, [...] Ah, but they *have*. Maybe you can do this research yourself with Google (it's on the web)?
From: "FromTheRafters" erratic on 11 Apr 2010 19:19 "The Real Truth MVP" <trt(a)void.com> wrote in message news:hpt5r8$90s$1(a)leythos.motzarella.org... > If I make an update two weeks later his will probably get updated. ....but the threads about the markers have *proven* the information flow was from his to yours. VG: It is not always about the "code" per se - there is work being done to target newly emerging malware for removal. After the work is done, the new software (not specifically program code) is available. Then, it becomes a part of PCButts' "program" and he claims it as his. The "markers" put in by the people actually doing the work - appear later in PCButts' program (and they consist of data *pointing* to PCButts as the lying thief that it is). There is no way PCButts can change the fact of information flow that provides the *proof* that "therealtruthlies". As to whether or not anyone can prove "injury", I don't know. The photo of Sara is probably in the Public Domain (IIRC by agreement at the site) and PCButts can do was it wishes with it - but just because it is legal doesn't make it ethical.
From: David Kaye on 11 Apr 2010 22:12
Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote: >No, Copyright does not require anything that you suggest, copyright is >assumed as soon as you create the work. The authors identity is attached >in clear form to the work that was pirated and removed by PCButts1. One way to further verify the authorship of a work is to add something frivolous. In mapmaking, a cartographer will add a fake street. In software I used to add fake code that was never called -- it looked pretty but it didn't do anything. |