Posted on 10/04/2006 11:35:01 AM PDT by ShadowAce
That's another (admittedly subtle) problem with this scheme -- turning off Aero in order to avoid having your system resources gobbled up left and right makes your display look just like that of a crook....
Bingo
provided that it's fully disclosed in advance
It's right there in the criminal code.
The criminal code says that software contains features that disable it if (the internal detector says that) you're running an unauthorized copy?
It seems like everyone around here (conservatives?) focuses on their inconvenience, but never on the filthy, lying, thieving scumbags who steal software.
That's my only point. They have a frickin right to protect their property. Particularly from commie bastards.
It used to be frowned upon by Americans, but it seems that many think it's ok to steal as long as you steal from big bad ole Microsoft and the like.
On these threads it's not what they say, it's what they don't say.
I used to think that, until I tried the clearview font smoothing that comes with XP. I like it so much, I even use it on my CRT.
But I also turn off most or all the crap that distinguishes XP from 2k.
Ok, here's what I say.
Unless you know what you are talking about you should shut up.
No. Really.
Because if you actually knew what you were talking about you would say "violated a copyright" rather than "steal" because that's what it is.
And if you actually knew what you were talking about you'd mention how copyrights are a limited license from the government after which all of that information becomes free for anyone to use, except that companies like Disney, Sony and Microsoft have bought themselves enough congressional representation to extend copyrights until the limited part is meaningless.
So a lot have people have decided that since these large, monopolistic companies have reneged on their part of the agreement, the public is off the hook.
The attitude is starting to become, "Fine, make copyright limits meaningless. And we'll violate said copyrights until you stop the crap and follow the Constitution. Keep adding all of your DRM and phone home crap and we'll keep breaking it, because you started this mess."
Because it's all about the right to protect property. The public's property, which forever copyrights have stolen.
And if you don't know that, you should shut your mouth. No, really.
I agree - but if I apply a crack to my purchased copy of Vista so that I can use it without any phone-homes to MS, I will do that with a perfectly clear conscience.
I've already done that with XP, and I sleep like a baby.
But just curious, you ever read the agreement when you buy software? You agree to it?
the state I live in charged me sales tax when I took the software home from the store (and my state does not charge tax on purchased computer -services-)....
and Microsoft does not pay a property tax in my state on the several million copies of Windows XP it supposedly still "owns" while installed on end user PC's here.
Sounds like a final sale to me.
You agreed, you reneged. Just like a liberal.
You cheat your insurance company too? Cable company?
And I'm sure you aren't lying about one thing, you sleep like a baby at night.
Puke
Which is mainly going to "punish" the network. Most users of zombied spamming and porn selling machines don't notice and don't care.
If you call copyright violation theft, you are either an idiot or just ignorant. As you've already been educated as to the difference ignorance is no longer an excuse.
And please keep opening your mouth. It makes it easy for us to determine your idiocy at a glance.
You see, words have meanings. Stealing from you means that I have it and you no longer do. Copyright violation means that I copied something of yours without your permission. You still have it.
Congress was able to figure this out. So have judges. Apparently just about everyone but you.
No it doesn't.
All the name calling in the world will not change what you are.
Not to mention you cannot be trusted on your word, you installed the software and then cowardly went back on your agreement. And since you never had any intention whatsoever of living up to your word, it was just a lie. And even a person as immoral as you knows what that makes you.
Yes. It does. I refer you to copyright law, US Code Title 17 versus US Code Title 18 which covers theft.
You are entitled to your own opinion. You are NOT entitled to your own facts.
And even a person as immoral as you knows what that makes you.
You seem to have jumped to a nonsensical conclusion. No where have I stated that I at any time have infringed Microsoft's copyright by making an unauthorized copy of any of their software. I've been referring to the law and the state of copyrights in this country.
I refer you to my tag line.
Now if you want to talk about immoral, we can talk about (ex-)Senator Fritz Hollings (D-Disney) and (late) Congressman Bono (R-Hollywood Movie Companies) who pushed through some very long copyright extensions making copyrights essentially forever, which is in direct violation of the Constitution of the United States, Article 1, Section 8 which says that Congress shall have the following authority:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
Note the "limited times" part of that. The purpose of which is clearly spelled out: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."
Not "To provide a perpetual income stream." Not "To provide for eternal control of an idea."
No, it's to provide for inventors and creators to get paid for their ideas before they go into the public domain, were they must inevitably go. By extending copyrights for hundreds of years those ideas will probably be useless by then, thus providing no promotion of progress.
The idea was that a creator would create something and after a limited time it would go into the public domain where it would then stimulate others into creating new works based on the old and so on and so forth. This has effectively stopped. I refer you to the same old crap coming out of Hollywood year after year.
I have no problem with Microsoft getting paid for their work. I do have a problem with the idea that they are entitled to getting paid for their work forever and with them creating locks and barriers in their software that ensures that even if copyright expires, no one will be able to use their software without their permission.
Activation, software encryption, DRM and a host of other methods have been used to try to ensure that no one can use software without the writer's permission, regardless of whether or not copyright has expired.
Taking these measures is cheating the copyright system because it prevents others from using the software after the copyright expires.
Gee, that's nice of you!
I do have a problem with the idea that they are entitled to getting paid for their work forever and with them creating locks and barriers in their software that ensures that even if copyright expires, no one will be able to use their software without their permission.
Thieves hate locks on doors.
BTW, us code title 17 does not define the broad term "stealing." You are entitled to make up facts any more than you are entitled to steal things you aren't bright enough to invent yourself.
Your problems with the criminals in government being in collusion with business is a different question than the one presented here.
Considering that they are relying on a taxpayer-supported limited monopoly (and that they've been found to have abused that monopoly), it is rather nice of me.
Thieves hate locks on doors.
Oooooh. Nice invective. Too bad it's meaningless.
BTW, us code title 17 does not define the broad term "stealing."
Hey, you got one right!
You are entitled to make up facts any more than you are entitled to steal things you aren't bright enough to invent yourself.
And then you blew it. Title 18 (which I also provided a reference to) DOES define theft. Read for comprehension next time.
Your problems with the criminals in government being in collusion with business is a different question than the one presented here.
Actually, it's not a different question. As long as criminals in businesses are in collusion with criminals in government to abuse the copyright system, I see no need for citizens to honor copyrights held by those businesses.
If the government wants us to honor the law, it should set a better example.
I'm sure they do.
However, we were talking about violating copyrights.
We are talking about thieves. And liars.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.