Stop Microsoft
Miscellaneous => The Lounge => Topic started by: Aloone_Jonez on 25 March 2006, 18:00
-
For some reason the forum software wouldn't let me post this so I've attatched it. :mad:
[verwijderd door de beheerder]
-
I tried to edit that text file into your post. Got your odd-ass error.
I tried to post the contents of that file. Got your odd-ass error.
What the hell is going on???????
EDIT: I can edit, I just can't edit that in? Someone's censoring the forum software? I just don't get this.
-
I don't know, maybe Refalm will, but for now I'd like to keep this thread on the topic of the contents of the text file rather than why I can't post it - we can use the other thread for that purpose.
-
The following is written by Aloone_Jonez:
I was researching assemblers when I came across MASM32 which isn't anything to do with Microsoft.
http://www.masm32.com/mlicence.htm (http://www.masm32.com/mlicence.htm)
This is the only EULA I've found that matches Microsoft's in evilness.
Here are the worst parts:
What you CANNOT do with the MASM32 Project.
4. You cannot use the MASM32 Project to write software for Non-Microsoft Operating Systems.
What the fuck, if someone runs my program under React OS or WINE then I can be sued?
Exclusion of "open" source projects and software.
The MASM32 project cannot be used to create open source software or any other project under any form of licence that requires the user of the MASM32 project to surrender the rights they are afforded under the MASM32 licence. In particular the MASM32 licence completely excludes projects licenced under the GNU organisation's published GPL licence and/or variants.
So now you're telling me what licence I should use for my work if I used your tool to create it - go fuck yourself.
The MASM32 Project is true freeware written by programmers for programmers so that they can realise the full power of the Windows Operating System without being subject to any additional conditions or external interests. The project has been designed as enabling technology to extend the capacity and range of programmers interested in learning and writing Microsoft assembler for Microsoft Operating Systems.
Yea right, if this shitware was written by programmers for programmers then decent programmers should understand that programmers should have the right to choose their own fucking licence and what fucking operating system they use. Go fuck yourselves. :fu:
I found it !!! ... a certain phrase causes it:
of "open" (no quotes)
... how very interesting :D
-
Feck, your right, "of "open" makes it error out
-
Good on you for finding this error, now back on topic please, what do you lot think of this fucked up EULA?
-
This is the only EULA I've found that matches Microsoft's in evilness.
Are you kidding? This thing makes Bill Gates look like Richard Stallman!
-
I agree, even their programming language licences allow the use of open source licences and non-MS operating systems.
The only advantage this has over MS' is it permits redistribution of their software. Personally I'd rather pay to use a programming language and do what I want with my work produced with it.
-
Why do you say that?
I disagree, I haven't seen anything in their programming language licences forbidding works created by them to be used under non-MS OSes or the use of open source licences.
The only advantage this has over MS' is it permits redistribution of their software. Personally I'd rather pay to use a programming language and do what I want with my work produced with it.
Just learn C and use gcc or C++ and g++ :P
-
I don't care, MASM is shit anyway, I know NASM which is far superiour and I find assembly far easier than C which is possibly the hardest language to learn.
I'm just having a bitch about ELUAs in general, normally I don't have a problem with the majority of payware and freeware licences but this one just takes the piss.
-
Use python ... :fu: M$ ... M$ is completely full of shit, they must be exterminated :cool:
looks like the phrase:
f "open" (no quotes)
also causes the unpostability
-
Why do you say that?
I disagree, I haven't seen anything in their programming language licences forbidding works created by them to be used under non-MS OSes or the use of open source licences.
Ummm...Microsoft lets you use Visual Studio for open source software. MASM does not. That makes MS look like they are promoting freedom, hence the RMS comment. Or are you one of those people who thinks RMS is evil too?
-
That kind of error happened to me too when I posted about the OpenBSD problems at http://www.microsuck.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10205
Nothing in there that could be censored. The errored attempts had the words
of 0penBSD
in it, which makes the forum BARF. Note that above it I used a zero instead of an "O" to keep it from barfing.
The forums have a serious bug.
-
Ummm...Microsoft lets you use Visual Studio for open source software. MASM does not. That makes MS look like they are promoting freedom, hence the RMS comment. Or are you one of those people who thinks RMS is evil too?
Sorry, I agree, I didn't read your post properly so I've edited my response to it.
By the way MASM and MASM32 are made by different people, the former is the Microsoft Assembler and the latter is the MASM32 project a clone of MASM. I wonder if MS could sue for trademark violation, I'd report them but I don't want them to read their EULA and get any ideas. Imagine a world where running OpenOffice and Firefox under Windows is illeagal and so is using Windows software under WINE. :eek:
EULAs carry far too much weight legally speaking and I think the courts should use a bit off common sense when they're concerned but since when have the courts ever had any common sense?
-
f free
-
i could have SWORN that would get an error
-
Use python ... :fu: M$ ... M$ is completely full of shit, they must be exterminated :cool:
Telling someone to use python instead of assembler is like telling someone to use a bug as a bus. And what does Microsoft have anything to do with any of this?
-
Telling someone to use python instead of assembler is like telling someone to use a bug as a bus. And what does Microsoft have anything to do with any of this?
By the way MASM and MASM32 are made by different people, the former is the Microsoft Assembler and the latter is the MASM32 project a clone of MASM.
Then use a non-M$ assembler.
:fu: M$
-
Telling someone to use python instead of assembler is like telling someone to use a bug as a bus. And what does Microsoft have anything to do with any of this?
you dont just TASTE the microsoft?
"full power of microsoft windows""wont restrict you"
HA the fucking hypertrolls
-
The MASM32 forum discusses why they have the license.
http://www.masm32.com/board/index.php?topic=171.0
They have some interesting debates on licenses.
http://www.masm32.com/board/index.php?PHPSESSID=e81342a3a5c55910a02079e49e8c1bf6&action=search2
http://www.masm32.com/board/index.php?topic=4966.0
Stan,
Before I say anything, I will say that you should have seen the GPL flame wars from a few years back over at "the other place" (the the whole forum was deleted so you can't see it any more). I hope this does not deteriorate into that.
I won't download, read, open, assemble, compile or in any other way touch the source of a GPL'd file because if I do, if I use any "ideas" contained within in my own source, by the GPL I should make my own source GPL. I will not - it's too all-encompassing and I HATE HATE HATE it with a vengence. If I had my way, the GPL would die in a burning ball of fire and anyone who supports its current details would go too.
Ossa
That's an interesting point, I can identify with it but I don't agree with it.
http://www.masm32.com/board/index.php?topic=2890.0
You need only get a local copyright. Copyrights are recognized internationally - except in places like China and Latin America. The Chinese don't give a bloody damn about intellectual property infringement except when it is done at the expense of their own wealthier companies. As for Latin America, it's pretty much the same situation, except that local organized crime rings (a.k.a. the local authorities) get involved if you or the U.S. fed's pay them off. If you are concerned though about algorithms of your own invention being used by others, don't bother with patents. They are a waste of money. Being that we're on the subject, I suppose I should mention that patents are valid only within the countries in which they are obtained. For coverage in foreign countries, you have one year to patent your inventions in those foreign countries from the time that you get your first patent; otherwise, your invention in those countries becomes a freebee. Besides that, software patents are not recognized in Europe because the EU counts software as mathematical formulas, which, like scientific principles, cannot be patented. Either way, you should be aware that regardless of what anybody ever says about software patent protection and such, the truth is software patents are just a self-defeating expense, and as such are pure b.s. sucker holes. The fatal flaw with all software patents is that anybody can legally prohibit their software from being reverse-engineered. This makes it impossible even just to legally look to see if anybody is possibly infringining on your software patent without admitting it to people. So unless some hypothetical WeazelSoft Corporation makes a confirmable statement incriminating them with infringing on your software patents, this WeazelSoft Corporation could be going every day to the U.S. Patents and Trademarks Office to copy and make use of ever last algorithm you ever patent, and there would be absolutely nothing you can do legally to check to see whether or not that is so, and much less to prove that such is the case. Therefore, stay away from software patents. Your only real legal protection of any sort comes from copyrights, and those only cover the exact specific material you provide with your copyright application, not any idea, design principle, or anything else of an abstract nature used there. If you want to prevent others from copying your algorithms, the only thing you really can do to that end is keep them to yourself.
I like what he says about software patants.
-
I won't download, read, open, assemble, compile or in any other way touch the source of a GPL'd file because if I do, if I use any "ideas" contained within in my own source, by the GPL I should make my own source GPL.
Last I checked, the GPL doesn't cover "ideas" like he says. It covers verbatim code copying.
-
If I had my way, the GPL would die in a burning ball of fire and anyone who supports its current details would go too.
I would like the opposite to happen.
-
There's also nasm (http://sourceforge.net/projects/nasm) ... "the famous Netwide Assembler". Hopefully it does approximately the same thing.
-
I won't download, read, open, assemble, compile or in any other way touch the source of a GPL'd file because if I do, if I use any "ideas" contained within in my own source, by the GPL I should make my own source GPL.
Last I checked, the GPL doesn't cover "ideas" like he says. It covers verbatim code copying.
The GPL is protected by copyright law.
Copyright doesn't cover "ideas," it covers expression of those ideas.
You could, in principle, not verbatim code copy, but change a few things around and still it would be copyright infringement. However, the point is that it covers code, not ideas.
-
The GPL is protected by copyright law.
Copyright doesn't cover "ideas," it covers expression of those ideas.
You could, in principle, not verbatim code copy, but change a few things around and still it would be copyright infringement. However, the point is that it covers code, not ideas.
Exactly, only patents cover ideas
... what a douche :thumbdwn: Maybe one day he'll get a taste of a good old M$ lawsuit for selling illegitimate copies of Window$. He would deserve it.
-
Anybody talking about disliking software covered by a specific COPYRIGHT license because of IDEAS has clearly no Fucking Clue or is trying to spread FUD.
Fucked up EULAs heh... I fail to see how anybody should have the right to prosecute for sharing, but that's just me.
-
yes, people shouldn't comment until they know what they are commenting on at least.
that said, a *lot* of people are confused about the differences between copyright and patenting, and this is why software patents are getting shoved through in law with nobody giving a fuck about it. information is required to combat the FUD!
-
Anybody talking about disliking software covered by a specific COPYRIGHT license because of IDEAS has clearly no Fucking Clue or is trying to spread FUD.
i vote fud, otherwise the license wouldn't say we are protecting you by not allowing you to use the gpl, it is the same ol' ms "the gpl is evil" shit that makes FUD stand for fucking unintelligent dumbass:fu: