More like MS paid off Linspire to change their name.
Anyways, barring any argument regarding your own ethical behavior, which most of us in this forum find lacking, you need to realize something. The ReactOS project does not require your approval to do anything. We do not need to be in your good graces and quite frankly, it's gotten to the point most of us don't even care what you think.
The only instance where you may have found something questionable, and frankly, the entire thing sounds more and more like you pursuing some kind of vendetta against Alex than actually trying to help the project, is looking to be more and more of a non-issue. Yes, MS has a copyright on that code, but they released it under one of their shared source licenses. If what we know about this license is correct, then the only thing that needs to be corrected is the copyright header. There would be no reason to pull it as we don't have a prejudice towards MS.
Following up on that, I guess I should make this clear. If MS were to suddenly come to us and say, here, we'll give you all the internal specifications and documentation, no strings attached, we'd take them. If they offered to license their code under the GPL for us, we'd take it. Yes, we know MS has a history of abusing its market share and all that other crap. We're not naive. But we're also very pragmatic. We do not automatically dismiss things MS releases. We'll actually take a good hard look to see whether it's of use to us and whether we can make use of it. If you don't like that, your problem.
Official Betov Allegations Clarification/Resolution Thread
Moderator: Moderator Team
All of the candidate-users around have the perfectly natural right of being informed about where you mean to go, and refusing to answer is also answering, as well as locking thread is answering, as well as attacking guys who report a problem is answering, and as well as damaging another GPLed Project is answering. Thanks for the multiple answers.The leaders, devs, testers, the community, all the people supporting ros owe you nothing! AFAICR you did never contribute anything to ReactOS, so why do you think you can demand anything from us?
Betov.
Ged, under some level of stupidity, i do not know what to answer.
Z98, if you come into the play, say everybody at which date Guga sent you the evidences, and how long i have been "pushing the case", before anybody could admit that there was a problem.
That being said, thanks for the clarification, which matches perfectly with what i was imagining.
Betov.
Z98, if you come into the play, say everybody at which date Guga sent you the evidences, and how long i have been "pushing the case", before anybody could admit that there was a problem.
That being said, thanks for the clarification, which matches perfectly with what i was imagining.
Betov.
Betov I was the one of the ones to clean up the mess you were creating. Ged displayed the same points I was pointing to.
When I confirmed the files you said were truly had incorrect header information of course I avoided the mailing list and forum because I feared you would make more stupid claims of there of "I was right" when you were completely wrong because you had not done the foot work. In effect stealing credit from the people who did the right things and using it to push false claims against others.
Now how do I confirm it was so simple. I emailed the project the file came from requesting if this claim ie your claim over the source of the files was true or was there some other common source I did not know about. I got a kinda consernd response of is anyone using that source code due to the headers being left off by mistake. So yes it was not reactos error. Now that evidence all possible arguments about copyright header past question. Note it was not only files with Microsoft Copyright either that were wrong. Its a little bit bigger than the small pocket you detected. So I found the evidence to get the completely cleaned up.
You method is betov would have missed the other files affected even if the developers had done what you said. So its a incompetent method. The legal method is the only way that can be used to clean up source code completely since its checks the source the file came from and will normally uncover other faults. It is very important to check for common source it has happened before. It is not uncommon for same sections of code to exist under different licenses it happens more often then not when programmers move between companies and wait off the coding cooling of time frame.
It was under 1 week with no fight after I passed it to the developers of Reactos with correct information disproving source for them to fix it yet you wasted 3 months. You could have had it done in a month at max if you did stuff right. Betov you keep on yelling about them not listening to you instead of doing what was legally required. So you have no right to claim the 3 months that was completely causes by your incompetents in handling a infringement claim. You really should have got legal advice how to correctly handle it betov would have saved Reactos from a lot of hassle.
Lindows did not claim to be windows or a Microsoft related product. So the only way Microsoft could get rid of the name was to buy it.
Sorry to say ROSasm is different. Very different. Yours is very close to gaim vs aim. Yes gaim lost and was forced to change there name to pidgin due to trade name infringement since they are depending on the name for trust. No money is required to change hands. Good bit with this kind of claim it only has to be done after your project is doing great and until is legally resolved can even get a injunction blocking any new releases from your project. Yes you cannot do the same back on Reactos.
Some how betov I think you are playing with people out of your league when it comes to handling stuff legally. Go to a lawyer handing copyright law and company names. If you don't believe that you stuffed up because they will tell you the same as me that you did big time. Because its a fool that hits the bear that can destroy them with a big stick.
When I confirmed the files you said were truly had incorrect header information of course I avoided the mailing list and forum because I feared you would make more stupid claims of there of "I was right" when you were completely wrong because you had not done the foot work. In effect stealing credit from the people who did the right things and using it to push false claims against others.
Now how do I confirm it was so simple. I emailed the project the file came from requesting if this claim ie your claim over the source of the files was true or was there some other common source I did not know about. I got a kinda consernd response of is anyone using that source code due to the headers being left off by mistake. So yes it was not reactos error. Now that evidence all possible arguments about copyright header past question. Note it was not only files with Microsoft Copyright either that were wrong. Its a little bit bigger than the small pocket you detected. So I found the evidence to get the completely cleaned up.
You method is betov would have missed the other files affected even if the developers had done what you said. So its a incompetent method. The legal method is the only way that can be used to clean up source code completely since its checks the source the file came from and will normally uncover other faults. It is very important to check for common source it has happened before. It is not uncommon for same sections of code to exist under different licenses it happens more often then not when programmers move between companies and wait off the coding cooling of time frame.
It was under 1 week with no fight after I passed it to the developers of Reactos with correct information disproving source for them to fix it yet you wasted 3 months. You could have had it done in a month at max if you did stuff right. Betov you keep on yelling about them not listening to you instead of doing what was legally required. So you have no right to claim the 3 months that was completely causes by your incompetents in handling a infringement claim. You really should have got legal advice how to correctly handle it betov would have saved Reactos from a lot of hassle.
Lindows did not claim to be windows or a Microsoft related product. So the only way Microsoft could get rid of the name was to buy it.
Sorry to say ROSasm is different. Very different. Yours is very close to gaim vs aim. Yes gaim lost and was forced to change there name to pidgin due to trade name infringement since they are depending on the name for trust. No money is required to change hands. Good bit with this kind of claim it only has to be done after your project is doing great and until is legally resolved can even get a injunction blocking any new releases from your project. Yes you cannot do the same back on Reactos.
Some how betov I think you are playing with people out of your league when it comes to handling stuff legally. Go to a lawyer handing copyright law and company names. If you don't believe that you stuffed up because they will tell you the same as me that you did big time. Because its a fool that hits the bear that can destroy them with a big stick.
One another layer of jam, oiaohm?
Well, first, for your information, the professional activity of my fellow, Guga, who first found out the piracies, is... a lawyer !
Second, when i registred and payed, for having the "RosAsm.org" domain name, it was clear that nothing had been registred with this name, and, as our logo indicates, "Ros", in RosAsm, stands for "Rose", as used by the Socialist french party.
Third, i don't care about your loop-hole game with the MicroSoft licences. If you prefer playing with the licences instead of rewritting the MicroSoft Code the way it should be done, this is not my problem. My problem, is that, as long you are much evidently taking the anti-ethical path of LinSpire, RosAsm has no more any target-OS. For now, i am going to buy another computer and to give a try to Ubuntu, in order to see if something could be doable with this. I doubt it serioulsy, considering that Linux Assembly is in the same state Windows Assembly was, 12 or 14 years ago (and there are valid reasons for this...), and considering that i am a bit old, now, for re-doing 10 years of similar efforts, even if WINE could help at the port.
Other than that, go to the Hell you deserve, and forget me, instead of trying to explain to me, how i should have reported the piracies, at a time when the leaders of ReactOS were doing their best to discredit me, to deny evidences, and to attack my GPLed Project, with arguments as absurd as yours.
Betov.
PS. I am suprised that this thread has not yet been locked, conforming to your usual "intellectual honnesty", as soon as something serious is being said...
Well, first, for your information, the professional activity of my fellow, Guga, who first found out the piracies, is... a lawyer !
Second, when i registred and payed, for having the "RosAsm.org" domain name, it was clear that nothing had been registred with this name, and, as our logo indicates, "Ros", in RosAsm, stands for "Rose", as used by the Socialist french party.
Third, i don't care about your loop-hole game with the MicroSoft licences. If you prefer playing with the licences instead of rewritting the MicroSoft Code the way it should be done, this is not my problem. My problem, is that, as long you are much evidently taking the anti-ethical path of LinSpire, RosAsm has no more any target-OS. For now, i am going to buy another computer and to give a try to Ubuntu, in order to see if something could be doable with this. I doubt it serioulsy, considering that Linux Assembly is in the same state Windows Assembly was, 12 or 14 years ago (and there are valid reasons for this...), and considering that i am a bit old, now, for re-doing 10 years of similar efforts, even if WINE could help at the port.
Other than that, go to the Hell you deserve, and forget me, instead of trying to explain to me, how i should have reported the piracies, at a time when the leaders of ReactOS were doing their best to discredit me, to deny evidences, and to attack my GPLed Project, with arguments as absurd as yours.
Betov.
PS. I am suprised that this thread has not yet been locked, conforming to your usual "intellectual honnesty", as soon as something serious is being said...
I would not have expected a incompetent Lawyer in the mix or was that lawyer sitting back and laughing guts up. If it was to go to court there would have been 0 financial gain disruption to project was the more profitable option. Thank you for helping lawyer in that by your incompetent actions because a lawyer winning is not always correcting things.
For some reason the source project was not contacted as what was legally required to follow a claim of wrong doing.
Sorry your explanation of RosAsm would fail due one line from your webpage. "RosAsm, the Bottom-Up Assembler for ReactOS". Context is part of the claim. If you project is truly target less I expect that to change. You cover explanation does not even pass the basic laugh test.
So Betov do you use gcc or binutils? Because by your logic we could not touch that either since it contains Microsoft Supplied code. It is not loop hole games as soon as you start cutting out were all the Microsoft samples under the same license you will also kill of some of the open source drivers in reactos and used under windows note developed for windows first. So your claim on rewriting is crap because reactos would not even have a complier by your rules.
If its under a valid license to be used there is no problem using it is my point of view. It does matter who the coding company was. Law does not give a legal stuff in this regard. Microsoft provided those samples for people to write applications basic OS's and anything else they wished. If they did not want to used in a OS they should have include a clause saying that.
You giving a stuff about something that should be just personal preference. Ie you would prefer that we would not use it. Not grounds to insult or slander people.
The problem was that you were reporting to the wrong people Betov. Reactos Developers answers sanos as source. By law they are not required to Audit that source code since it was imported. So that was the dead end for copyright infringement for Reactos at that point. So you got slammed hard for wasting there time. What you truly were. Only way forward was to move on to sanos and contact them.
Its like saying a Linux Distro has to Audit every program source they use. Or Microsoft has to audit every program that runs on there platform. Law clearly does not require this.
A person with the correct facts done correctly could never have been discredited.
I suspect if you can get out of using incorrect methods Betov you may be useful. I would not tried as hard to show you the correct way if there was not benefits to it.
Because I can in my mind see you will find something else somewhere that you think is infringing and get shutdown again and start complaining to high heaven because of your determination is not targeted the correct way to track down the facts and present them correctly so there is no room for dispute. Your determination is targeted at winning small zone fight not winning war. My skill is winning wars. Not all work out of course. Looking like you might be a lost cause.
Linux Assembly is DEAD. Most likely stay that way. Reason code on linux has to be processor independent to get effective market.
ps Smile faces seams to be the sign when you think you are being smart. Its also seams to line up with when you logic is incomplete.
ps You keep trying to distract by bring up other things. Its only giving me more things to pick on. It is a way to loss a war. Then wonder why you got ponded. Because I get to pick what I class as a weak point to attack.
If you have not worked out yet I am assessing you. To see what can be done to shutdown someone getting on the wrong tangent effectively and get to the correct result quicker.
For some reason the source project was not contacted as what was legally required to follow a claim of wrong doing.
Sorry your explanation of RosAsm would fail due one line from your webpage. "RosAsm, the Bottom-Up Assembler for ReactOS". Context is part of the claim. If you project is truly target less I expect that to change. You cover explanation does not even pass the basic laugh test.
So Betov do you use gcc or binutils? Because by your logic we could not touch that either since it contains Microsoft Supplied code. It is not loop hole games as soon as you start cutting out were all the Microsoft samples under the same license you will also kill of some of the open source drivers in reactos and used under windows note developed for windows first. So your claim on rewriting is crap because reactos would not even have a complier by your rules.
If its under a valid license to be used there is no problem using it is my point of view. It does matter who the coding company was. Law does not give a legal stuff in this regard. Microsoft provided those samples for people to write applications basic OS's and anything else they wished. If they did not want to used in a OS they should have include a clause saying that.
You giving a stuff about something that should be just personal preference. Ie you would prefer that we would not use it. Not grounds to insult or slander people.
The problem was that you were reporting to the wrong people Betov. Reactos Developers answers sanos as source. By law they are not required to Audit that source code since it was imported. So that was the dead end for copyright infringement for Reactos at that point. So you got slammed hard for wasting there time. What you truly were. Only way forward was to move on to sanos and contact them.
Its like saying a Linux Distro has to Audit every program source they use. Or Microsoft has to audit every program that runs on there platform. Law clearly does not require this.
A person with the correct facts done correctly could never have been discredited.
I suspect if you can get out of using incorrect methods Betov you may be useful. I would not tried as hard to show you the correct way if there was not benefits to it.
Because I can in my mind see you will find something else somewhere that you think is infringing and get shutdown again and start complaining to high heaven because of your determination is not targeted the correct way to track down the facts and present them correctly so there is no room for dispute. Your determination is targeted at winning small zone fight not winning war. My skill is winning wars. Not all work out of course. Looking like you might be a lost cause.
Linux Assembly is DEAD. Most likely stay that way. Reason code on linux has to be processor independent to get effective market.
ps Smile faces seams to be the sign when you think you are being smart. Its also seams to line up with when you logic is incomplete.
ps You keep trying to distract by bring up other things. Its only giving me more things to pick on. It is a way to loss a war. Then wonder why you got ponded. Because I get to pick what I class as a weak point to attack.
If you have not worked out yet I am assessing you. To see what can be done to shutdown someone getting on the wrong tangent effectively and get to the correct result quicker.
Again ?! Take care: The jam is going to fall on the table !
Yes, i know, this does not make any sense for you, but keep 100% sure that the fellows who have contributed to this Development environment, would never have taken, nor included, anything from MicroSoft. You know what? The very first requirement, before being accepted in the RosAsm team, is ethical and political. Competencies come last.
For Linux Assembly, yes, i perfectly know that it is dead. Windows Assembly was also dead 12 years ago, and I am not here to convince you of the vertues of Assembly, nor of the value of the impressive job done by a bunch of pioneers. You can call me crazy, on that point. But you will never succeed to get a thick enough layer of jam for hidding the facts.
And yes, the RosAsm Page says "RosAsm, the Bottom-Up Assembler for ReactOS", because each instruction of its 4 Megas of Assembly Source (yes, i know that you ignore what quantity of work that 1 mega of Assembly represents...) has been devoted to ReactOS, since day one, this is to say, the day when i first heard of ReactOS. I would never have started this Project for Windows. This displeases You? Perfect: You displeas me too, as anything ready to sell the volunteers efforts to MicroSoft displeases me.
Betov.
As you seem to not even know what you are talking about, and for your information, RosAsm is pure Auto-Compilable Assembly, devoted to the production of Applications written in pure Assembly.So Betov do you use gcc or binutils?
Yes, i know, this does not make any sense for you, but keep 100% sure that the fellows who have contributed to this Development environment, would never have taken, nor included, anything from MicroSoft. You know what? The very first requirement, before being accepted in the RosAsm team, is ethical and political. Competencies come last.
For Linux Assembly, yes, i perfectly know that it is dead. Windows Assembly was also dead 12 years ago, and I am not here to convince you of the vertues of Assembly, nor of the value of the impressive job done by a bunch of pioneers. You can call me crazy, on that point. But you will never succeed to get a thick enough layer of jam for hidding the facts.
And yes, the RosAsm Page says "RosAsm, the Bottom-Up Assembler for ReactOS", because each instruction of its 4 Megas of Assembly Source (yes, i know that you ignore what quantity of work that 1 mega of Assembly represents...) has been devoted to ReactOS, since day one, this is to say, the day when i first heard of ReactOS. I would never have started this Project for Windows. This displeases You? Perfect: You displeas me too, as anything ready to sell the volunteers efforts to MicroSoft displeases me.
Betov.
-
FlyingIsFun1217
- Posts: 475
- Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 3:56 am
-
Tachikoma_Pilot
- Posts: 107
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:56 pm
Read most of the locked threads in "General Discussion" and you'll get a fair idea.FlyingIsFun1217 wrote:Not to hijack the thread and ruin the... spirit...
Just wondering what this is about. I can tell certain parties are against each other in a sense, but what about? And how does this affect ROS?
FlyingIsFun1217
*sits back and watches*
-
2th_noname
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 1:04 am
Always then, if the guys from ReactOS lost its arguments, Z98 emerges. Then it occurs one of three things:Z98 wrote:All of you, just shut up and leave this alone. The issue's been resolved and we already know the files aren't a problem. End of story. If you want to continue fighting, do it off the forums.
1.) All are requested to say nothing more.
2.) The last post is simply deleted by him.
3.) Someone from ReactOS posts a stupid answer and the thread is closed immediately by Z98.
Z98 do your magic!
I do Betov the code to support PE executables was put into gcc and binutils by Microsoft so they could use in there posix subsystem. There was a reason why the related license from Microsoft was where it was in the reactos source. Yes it did have nothing to do with the code you found just happens to be one of the right licenses those files from it could be under.
Fine your project can have those rules. Problem is those rules are just unworkable for a project like Reactos. Particularly if we want outside companies to open source drivers for use in Reactos. Since you can bet a lot will contain Microsoft licensed but legal to use code. Only rule that is workable is the one I stated if its legal use it. The political bit will not work here. Ethical should still work here.
I know the qualities of assembler very well. I also know assemblers defects. You may have done an impressive job but not being cross platform/processor becomes a weakness. It is the major weakness of assembler code. Next weakness is normally optimization variation from processor to processor slightly higher code can have better overall performance even that assembler will bet it on one processor model. Now if you have beating the second the market where that is truly required is embedded work. Assembler in Reactos is benched against its equal code in C. Yes in places its faster but in others it works out slower due to blocking optimizing. Note I do embed work on pic and avr chips a lot there is timing variations even inside them and weakness in optimization is a big problem.
2th_noname hijacking threads is not tolerated. When you have a issue you should start your own thread then it will not risk being locked for being of topic or talk on the issue that the thread is truly about. Please put your case correctly together without requiring other people to assemble information to prove it then we can truly deal with it. Baseless rumoring or what appears to be baseless also risks getting locked quickly. One of the problems betov beat his head against. Thinking you have the right answer is not exactly enough. Proving that you are right correctly is enough.
Thanks for your time betov I have found out what I need to know about why the issue between you and Reactos run so far out of control. Hopefully I can develop set of methods or information to reduce the chance of it happening again. Sorry Z98 for the inconvenience.
Fine your project can have those rules. Problem is those rules are just unworkable for a project like Reactos. Particularly if we want outside companies to open source drivers for use in Reactos. Since you can bet a lot will contain Microsoft licensed but legal to use code. Only rule that is workable is the one I stated if its legal use it. The political bit will not work here. Ethical should still work here.
I know the qualities of assembler very well. I also know assemblers defects. You may have done an impressive job but not being cross platform/processor becomes a weakness. It is the major weakness of assembler code. Next weakness is normally optimization variation from processor to processor slightly higher code can have better overall performance even that assembler will bet it on one processor model. Now if you have beating the second the market where that is truly required is embedded work. Assembler in Reactos is benched against its equal code in C. Yes in places its faster but in others it works out slower due to blocking optimizing. Note I do embed work on pic and avr chips a lot there is timing variations even inside them and weakness in optimization is a big problem.
2th_noname hijacking threads is not tolerated. When you have a issue you should start your own thread then it will not risk being locked for being of topic or talk on the issue that the thread is truly about. Please put your case correctly together without requiring other people to assemble information to prove it then we can truly deal with it. Baseless rumoring or what appears to be baseless also risks getting locked quickly. One of the problems betov beat his head against. Thinking you have the right answer is not exactly enough. Proving that you are right correctly is enough.
Thanks for your time betov I have found out what I need to know about why the issue between you and Reactos run so far out of control. Hopefully I can develop set of methods or information to reduce the chance of it happening again. Sorry Z98 for the inconvenience.
Quite frankly, there's no reason for me to lock this thread. Even Betov has admitted his issues were addressed. My warning was aimed at other people who might want to pressure him.
As for you, 2th, you've already demonstrated your sole intention is to damage the project. While we may hold that against you, we recognize the fact that you're entitled to your opinions, and quite frankly, none of us see any point in exerting the effort to try and convince you otherwise, since your attitude suggests you don't want to be convinced. But that does not mean I will tolerate you breaking the rules on this forum. If in your antagonism you step over the line, I won't hesitate to slap you down.
As for you, 2th, you've already demonstrated your sole intention is to damage the project. While we may hold that against you, we recognize the fact that you're entitled to your opinions, and quite frankly, none of us see any point in exerting the effort to try and convince you otherwise, since your attitude suggests you don't want to be convinced. But that does not mean I will tolerate you breaking the rules on this forum. If in your antagonism you step over the line, I won't hesitate to slap you down.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests