Christian: Hmm, in one message you back off legality and asserted morality, and now we're back to legal issues. Sounds like you've got the corner on ethical frameworks.
Are you a lawyer? I am a lawyer, and while no expert in IP law, I deal in it a lot, enough to scoff at the concept of black & white. This is not a black & white issue as you suggest, at least, not without much more factual information. After over 20 years in the law, I haven't met anyone in a long time who uses the phrase "black & white" in connection with a legal issue. One person's clarity is another person's muck of opportunity. Besides, you are now dodging the point. You are persisting in your straw man argument even though it is not pertinent to the facts at hand, and the "academic interest" argument you make about my friend's situation is just silly. You speculate about facts you know nothing about--and of course you only speculate about those that might support your position. You have no knowledge of what my associate's level of freedom was to disclose these items to me.......do you? As for the shareware argument, that's a red herring if there ever was one. In fact, I *have* written software myself [silly Double Helix stuff a few years back for my then private law office which someone borrowed without my permission], so I have some concept of economic interest. But that's irrelevant. Shareware *depends* on free distribution, with a reliance on some crippling mechanisms or honesty to help make the system work. MS Office is not shareware, so that's not pertinent. If MS Office were shareware, we would not be having this discussion. That's the "value deprived" argument; I have deprived MS of no value. I have paid copies of Office 2001, and now, thanks to MS and Outpost, and Zones, and MacMall, I will also have paid copies of Office X. Sorry, but I still don't think you've occupied any high moral or legal ground here. P.S. Just wait till you have two toddlers at 3am. ;-) Greg -------------- On 11/20/01 8:14 AM, Christian M. M. Brady was willing to say outloud: > On 11/20/01 9:57 AM, "Greg Hammond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Christian: >> >> Leaving aside your assumptions, some of which are wrong about my activity, >> get off your high horse. You have no authority to arbitrate morality in my >> universe. OTOH, if you want to say that it's just "your opinion" that it's >> wrong, that's fine, but so what? What possible bearing does it have on the >> discussion? I asked an objective question, unrelated to your personal >> morals. > > Well it is not just my opinion. It is a matter of what is legal and what is > not. There is no high horse here folks. Just a question of law. > >> Harry hit it on the head with his three categories, in fact, both sets of >> his categories. OTOH, whether or not I should have even raised the issue on >> this list--given the number of other questions about Entourage X on this >> list--strikes me as largely irrelevant, but a point on which folks can >> genuinely disagree. > > Folks can perhaps disagree, but it is not a disagreement with me, it is a > disagreement with our laws. Harry's description of those categories are > accurate, but it does not alter the legal facts. This is actually very black > and white. (As someone pointed out to me off list, if you or Harry produced > shareware software, for example, you might have very different feelings > about this.) >> >> P.S. FWIW, I was loaned a PB to use with Office X on it [actually swapped >> with my PB]; at first, it had Xb15, and then it was loaned to me again with >> X GM over the weekend. Why did this happen? The person who loaned it to >> me--who is apparently authorized to have the software--knows that I work in >> a nearly entirely PC company. He has consulted for my company before. When I >> joined the company about 4 years ago, I brought my Mac to work. For a year >> and a half, it was the only Mac; now however, there are 10 Mac users in this >> company of about 300, including a completely "Mac-ified" marketing >> department [with two dual processor G4 desktops, PB G4, iBook, etc.]. My CFO >> came to me for advice on what to buy his daughters this past week; I >> recommended Mac, and Office X was a huge selling point. > > I think that�s fine and I am glad that you were able to help someone make > the decision that is best for them. The description of the situation above > actually brings up some other legal angles on it (and this is truly OT), not > sure of the details, but if we considered your friend a beta tester, under > an NDA from MS, then *they* would probably be in violation of it for showing > it to you. Not sure.... Just an academic interest there... > >> So, now do you feel better? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I do not care. I >> sleep just fine at night. > > Oh I feel just fine, thank you for asking. I sleep reasonably well, but > would sleep a lot better without a toddler crawling in the bed at 3 am! ;-) > > Cb > cbrady @ tulane.edu -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To search the archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
