Official Betov Allegations Clarification/Resolution Thread

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Floyd
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 7:45 am
Location: The frozen part of the USA

Post by Floyd » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:08 pm

oiaohm wrote:Betov any large project will have errors. That is the normal thing.

Please don't claim trash.
There is no doubt that MicroSoft will sue ReactOS, as soon as it will become a danger for their incomes.
Besides there is a correct legal process they have to go threw before they can sue.
microsoft can sue if they want. they could sue for something as simple as "look and feel". and he is right, they WILL sue eventually or at the very least offer a cease and desist. if this ever goes to court ReactOS will lose simply because microsoft has the funds to keep it in court forever and all they have to do is offer an injunction. at which point ReactOS will only be legal overseas.
pax mei amici amorque et Iesus sacret omnia

Nmn
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:20 pm
Location: In front of my pc maybe?

Post by Nmn » Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:27 pm

As much as i believe React OS is perfectly legal, I have to agree to the above. Microsoft has money. Lots of money. Lots and lots and lots. The reality is that in the US (unfortunately for me, who is in the US right now) the people with money win over half the time. You can fight that, but the reality stands.

Sure, it will be legal non-US locations, but it would be sucky if i wasn't "supposed" to download it. I know, its kinda like "Who the hell cares about them saying you couldn't use 'No-CSS'?" (Just to answer that, linux distributors, but the users probably end up following guides online anyways.)

I think the right thing is being done, but in any case, The React OS developers should be able to do as they want. They don't really need to listen to the users - thats a privilege we have.

As for the RosAsm thing... That was a really cool assembler. I also happen to know about the fact that it did its own assembly. Sorry to see the name is such a big deal... Though i haven't been following to see if there is a reason to not want ReactOS or similar names plastered over random 3rd party software or just this in particular or anything. To be honest with you, Microsoft didn't really get mad when people prefixed their software with win* or win32* or used the suffix "For Windows" so i don't see why the ReactOS team would be any more concerned. I guess I'll go look at the older discussions for that.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 » Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:16 pm

It has more to do with Betov's refusal to add a disclaimer stating his project has nothing to do with ROS. Betov isn't exactly in good standing in the assembly community and we're not the only project he's gone after. And rest assured that if asked, the ROS devs themselves can point out some technical flaws in Betov's assembler. Just know that ROS' reputation suffered in the assembly community when Betov first started using ROS in his assembler's name.

Also, you're forgetting that ROS is Europe/Russia based. If it came down to a fight in the courts, and if we win in the European courts, the US court system can't legally get in our way unless they want to really piss off the Europeans. There was a legal ruling a little while back in the EU that kinda said European countries would apply the rulings of their highest court over that of the US Supreme Court in their dealings with the US.

Nmn
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:20 pm
Location: In front of my pc maybe?

Post by Nmn » Thu Aug 23, 2007 12:39 am

Oh, ok. That actually makes some sense.

Well, either way, Windows Assembly and ReactOS assembly are the same thing - I guess programs that are written for an OS should have to be forced to make notice that the code is unrelated to the OS if the authors think its nessesary - But you don't see WinZip getting any trouble. Then again, that software has become well made over time. And i guess it isn't the same with Windows as it is for ReactOS when it comes to reputations.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:08 am

Floyd there is extream question if Microsoft can even sue over look and fell. Most likely not due to the fact that could reopen the fight between Microsoft and Apple. There is already minor differences in Reactos look and feel and Microsoft look and feel. Note a look and feel case will not stop the reactos kernel from being shipped. Hopefully KDE 4 is out by then for windows. Even if its not we could ship some other desktop until it gets sorted out.

My comments were directly related to the use of source code. There are rules amount of money does not change the rules.

Cease and Desist was one of the pieces of papers I was indirectly referring to. Ie giving notice of problem its the non nice form. Law requires excepting a possible valid explanation. Then the project Reactos sourced the code from would have been sent a Cease and Desist and if that worked then we would have to be sent a new Cease and Desist pointing out source was flawed. Zero hit since 30 days is classed as fair notice to Cease and Desist. Its a requirement before action in court could be taken on a possible source code and a lot of other things breach.

Reason why these normally get settled out of court. Even when it comes to gpl breaches most companies settle the out of court. Reactos should be no different.

Yes I expect to see Microsoft Cease and Desist sent. Something only gets to sue if both parties disagree. Large amount of money means you can keep a disagreement going. Does not mean you can start it.

Injunction's normally cannot be issued without valid grounds and documentation that other parity is not interested settlement.

Please note Microsoft keeping it going threw the courts also risks a reverse injection to force settlement. Being rich helps to get good lawyers. There are many reasons for Microsoft to sue as Against.

If someone takes something before a court without going threw the correct ways to settle before hand. Its called wasting the courts time and gets thrown out in first court with no right of appeal. In countries with double jeopardy laws they can never bring that case before a court again. It is a stupid lawyer who does that since its the only complete loss you can every really get in the first court sitting.

Yes legally Microsoft cannot attack us without clear and valid notice and chance to settle.

Fear of being sued is stupidity. Fear of getting short times to fix is more of a issue. Please put this fear to bed and work on the correct interactions so it can never happen since we never need give anyone a chance to start it.

Its also the reason why all fights need to be handled cleanly and legally. Betov was not really handled cleanly.

Winzip and Winamp... All the ones starting with win is a different matter. Context is part of the issue. We could not stop a person using ROS if they made it extreamly clear in product that it was not related to Reactos. Winzip and Winamp had no competing product in the same class when they started. ROSAsm has Reactos own ROS build env. Both can build asm code. Yes there is a overlap then the ROS Asm does not make it clean that is not associated with Reactos. Instead it gives the impression it is. Its not exactly the use of ROS is the problem. Its the impression its giving by using it. Making up crap about where ROS name came from means nothing in court. Its all down to if by using X mark you are damaging another company. Information exists to suggest ROS Asm is.

Note the change does not need to be massive. Even a rename to Betov's ROS Asm could be enough. Short name of program name could stay ROSAsm. Just so its clear that its no the main Reactos Project.

Nmn
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:20 pm
Location: In front of my pc maybe?

Post by Nmn » Thu Aug 23, 2007 2:33 am

Well, I'll bet FreeASM isn't used yet.

Anyways, i decided to check the homepage, and i happen to notice all mentioning of React OS is gone, besides on the OS support list. The program still contains reference however.

iaindickson90
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:30 am

Post by iaindickson90 » Thu Aug 23, 2007 2:55 pm

oiaohm wrote: Yes I expect to see Microsoft Cease and Desist sent. Something only gets to sue if both parties disagree. Large amount of money means you can keep a disagreement going. Does not mean you can start it.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that MS will be sending this kind of action againts ReactOS. And they are definitely not going to be nice about it, they will try every trick in the book to try and make sure that this OS does not work.

Seeing as it is in Europe/Russia, does give an advantage (Americans have learnt their lesson) but this still constitutes a problem. If ReactOS is "banned" in the US, then that is a huge amount of support that has gone.

If this project is going to get anywhere, it has to make sure that it has no weaknesses that MS can exploit. Yes money as an issue, but this can be worked around.

As well as this, there will be points when MS Shared Licence code is required, i have no doubt about that. It just means everyone has to be careful and make sure it knows where everything is coming from, and make sure that it is completely recognised in legal terms.

The only thing at the moment that i believe they could get hectic about is "the look" but this is such a small issue that could be resolved quickly.

I really hope that all these legal issues are over, seeing as i look forward to a time when i can use it properly. I wish i was back in Europe again ;P

Iain

Nmn
Posts: 170
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:20 pm
Location: In front of my pc maybe?

Post by Nmn » Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:41 pm

I know people are afraid it will lose support, but it won't. Do you seriously think people from the US are afraid to download NoCSS? And i don't see too many of my friends quiting torrents any time soon. So, as much as banning ROS would be an outrage to us of the United States, It probably wouldn't effect those who come here understanding what ReactOS is and what its about - it may effect those who are looking for a free copy of Windows, though.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:03 am

Banning Reactos will take longer in USA. It would risk setting off a chain reaction effect. Since large sections of Reactos source code comes from other Open Source Projects used on Linux. Patent Attack would be risky.

DCMA breach most likely we could just remove the offending section for USA shipping.

Simply I don't know of any attack that could get Reactos baned in the USA that one would not see Microsoft in a battle with the largest computer orginzation(Linux Foundation) on earth or simply fixable by removing or disabling part for USA version.

Note quite a few members of the Linux Foundation have twice as much money as Microsoft. Yes Microsoft is not the richest company in the computer world. Scary though is that if 1 percent of a months income for the members of the Linux Foundation could buy Microsoft out twice. So Microsoft resources is not even in the same league. Reason why lot of the Linux Foundation Members against Microsoft current patent claims on Linux sitting there and say show us and is most likely why Microsoft has not done court action. The old enemy of our enemy is our friend.

I am a Linux User so bias. If you hate something about Linux fine. Just don't be insulting about it. Reason Reactos might need support from related companies. Same with insulting Microsoft heavily its not a good thing to be kicking bears in nuts.

This is why I say fear need to be kept in prospective. What can be done has a lot of limits on it.

As I say there are many reasons for and against Microsoft attacking Reactos. Microsoft will have to do a risk assessment on there action against Reactos. Lots of lines are just too risky for any company to dare unless they want to go the way of SCO.

fennec
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:53 am

Post by fennec » Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:24 am

I think "we" should quit debating about potential MS legal attacks. It's just a waste of time IMHO. If MS want to attack they'll have to, at least send a warning. In this case i think OpenSource community would be more than happy to help removing incriminated code.

Betov
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:53 am

Post by Betov » Fri Aug 24, 2007 8:49 am

I think "we" should quit debating about potential MS legal attacks. It's just a waste of time IMHO.
Right. This is ridiculous. MicroSoft will have no choice but doing so, or to dismiss, or to buy "you". I bet on the third choice, and, given what i have seen, i have no doubt that "you" will accept the money.
If MS want to attack they'll have to, at least send a warning. In this case i think OpenSource community would be more than happy to help removing incriminated code.
I recommend the guys who will want to report "problems", the way i did, to protect themselves seriously before doing so. Giving a hand to snakes may be dangerous. :shock:


Betov.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:23 am

I recommend anyone one who wants to report problems do it by the book.

That is don't copy what Betov did. Because that just causes a hand full of snakes.

Come on its not a complex method.

Notify right people of problem.
Yelling at reactos that X code matchs Microsoft Code when its imported code really risks getting bitten hard.

Right people are the creators or maintainers of the code. Outside that Betov yelled about reactos had imported and never altered. So were never the maintainers. Only time it become Reactos problem is if the other project was dead.

Sorry to say Betov I have no mercy for people who do it wrong. The answer you got legally ended it. Continual bashing head against a wall of no more legal need is not friendly and of course creates hate against you for wasting there time.

Get to know copyright law. Perfectly matched code only give the possibility of infringement does not prove it. Contacting Author/Maintainer of that code is required to complete case.

Minor errors in handling equals disputes. There really needs to be a guide this is how you should do it so you can never get fried.

The rules of the copyright are the same no matter if you are Microsoft or a Person off the street. If you do it by the rules there is no question or fight possible. I had Zero problems doing it. I did not need any defense. Heres the information exactly proving case past question

Get off the wild guesses Betov. Microsoft will think very carefully before attacking and they will play by the book or loss badly if they attack. So they are 1000 times simpler to deal with than what you were.

Attempting to buy would be interesting too. We will handle it when or if its happens. We are not bias Microsoft haters here. If the deal is right for the future of Reactos it should be considered.
Number 1 Reactos remains Open Source ie GPL.
Number 2 Reactos is fully immune to any patent Microsoft is allowed to use.
Number 3 Reactos Core developers are funded.
No point closing door on valid funding.

There is nothing to Fear at this time. Its like a person worrying about dieing from everything. Worry about stuff that is fact.

Betov
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:53 am

Post by Betov » Fri Aug 24, 2007 11:01 am

Attempting to buy would be interesting too. We will handle it when or if its happens. We are not bias Microsoft haters here. If the deal is right for the future of Reactos it should be considered.
Thanks for confirming publicly, the conclusion i came to, oiaohm.

About the way for reporting, i warn anyone who who like to report anything, that my first question, 3 months ago, was:

"Who is the maintainer of the Audit?"

I am still waiting for an answer. So, try to find out some other first question to ask. I'd suggest:

"Hi! I have found out piracies in ReactOS Sources. Please, when you will get 20 millions dollars from MicroSoft, send me 5%".

8)

Betov.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm » Fri Aug 24, 2007 1:10 pm

I think You have taken this of mine slightly out of context betov.
Attempting to buy would be interesting too. We will handle it when or if its happens. We are not bias Microsoft haters here. If the deal is right for the future of Reactos it should be considered.
We I was using was not the Reactos we. It was the reactos community we. Note I am not part of the Reactos Development Team so I cannot use the Reactos we.

If the deal is not good for Reactos someone here will clone the project even if it has to be me. The one problem with Open Source annoy the community get forked. Buying a open source project its critical to keep the community on side.

There is a reason why you have not be answers to who is the maintainer of the Audit Betov. Are you prepaid to state that in future you will research problems you find by the legal play book and mean it. Ie if its from a external project inform external project of problem and document their explanation. So that you could never be wrong. Not pester the hell out of the maintainer without doing the correct actions. As well as giving maintainer valid time to deal with problem.

Yes your actions have caused a wall of we will not answer questions because they don't want to attempted to be beat to believe without correct path being done. At this point is not above forgiveness if you except your mistakes in handling. Of course that does not say what all the Reactos people did was right either.

Also if you had read the legal methods to handle copyright infringement you would not need to ask who the maintainer of the audit is because there is always a answer who to contact in case of suspected copyright infringement. At min you will get that answer from me.

Its a bad company that pays someone who's motive is cash to find a copyright breach. Since the evidence is normally useless due to being incomplete or a setup.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 » Fri Aug 24, 2007 4:17 pm

Betov wrote: "Who is the maintainer of the Audit?"
There is no "maintainer" of the audit. You either directly contact Fireball (Aleksey Bragin) if you believe you've found a problem, as he's the project coordinator and the one who handles those issues, or you go through someone like me who will then pass on the information. But even after we receive the information, it may take weeks to either produce a workaround or figure out whether the claims have any merit. This happened with your case because we had to do the investigation ourselves, such as talking with the SanOS guy and then checking what kind of licensing this code was under. Cause despite what most people think, Microsoft does release some code under permissive licenses, and they have also taken BSD licensed code and relicensed it themselves.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Yandex [Bot] and 1 guest