Microsoft has removed 500+ groups, including 21 Windows-98 groups
in [Windows 98]
|
From: MEB on 19 Dec 2009 12:56 On 12/19/2009 12:41 PM, John John - MVP wrote: > MEB wrote: >> On 12/18/2009 06:14 PM, Etal wrote: >>> MEB wrote: >>> >>>> Etal wrote: >>>>> ( Regarding "microsoft.public.it.windows7" ) >>>>> >>>>> Are corporations now disallowing humanity to organize its >>>>> discussions in >>>>> logical ways? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> It can do what it wishes, YOU on the other hand, have ZERO right to >>>> use >>>> Microsoft's microsoft.public. hierarchy. Call it anything you want, but >>>> don't try to foster fraud by forging Microsoft's forums... which it >>>> holds legal right to. >>>> >>> >>> It (corporations) can do as it wishes on their own servers yes. And i >>> guess we can agree that i have zero right to create or remove various >>> newsgroups on their NNTP-servers. >>> >>> However, if i setup my own NNTP server, i might create a group >>> 'microsoft.public.knitting'. If anyone wants to configure their >>> newsclient so it connects to my server to lurk or post to that group >>> they can do so - if i let them. I will have the ability to filter/censor >>> any posts not related to knitting, or if i so choose filter any post >>> that are. It wouldn't be running on 'msnews.microsoft.com', or somehow >>> pretending to, so how is that fostering fraud? >>> >>> >> >> NO. Check the Law if it really interests you. Usenet is NOT above any >> Law nor are the parties that use it. > > Maybe the 'Peoples' Counsel' should check the law himself, the US > Supreme Court has already ruled that the Internet and Usenet is > protected by the First Amendment. Is the 'Peoples' Counsel' not > familiar with the challenge from the Church of Scientology? Do you > remember what happened with that? Did they succeed in preventing the > use of their name in newsgroup names? > HAHAHAHA, wrong argument. The case [and there are others] you mention deals with SPECIFIC issues to the individual NOT the theft or fraud associated with attempting to falsely portray being Microsoft *IN ITS OWN NEWSGROUPS*. Keep searching, direct your searches more towards property rights, and rulings pursuant issues of theft, fraud, and the other that would and is occurring by the false presentation of being Microsoft IN ITS OWN NEWSGROUPS. -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking http://peoplescounsel.org The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government ___---
From: John John - MVP on 19 Dec 2009 13:06 MEB wrote: > On 12/19/2009 12:41 PM, John John - MVP wrote: >> MEB wrote: >>> On 12/18/2009 06:14 PM, Etal wrote: >>>> MEB wrote: >>>> >>>>> Etal wrote: >>>>>> ( Regarding "microsoft.public.it.windows7" ) >>>>>> >>>>>> Are corporations now disallowing humanity to organize its >>>>>> discussions in >>>>>> logical ways? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> It can do what it wishes, YOU on the other hand, have ZERO right to >>>>> use >>>>> Microsoft's microsoft.public. hierarchy. Call it anything you want, but >>>>> don't try to foster fraud by forging Microsoft's forums... which it >>>>> holds legal right to. >>>>> >>>> It (corporations) can do as it wishes on their own servers yes. And i >>>> guess we can agree that i have zero right to create or remove various >>>> newsgroups on their NNTP-servers. >>>> >>>> However, if i setup my own NNTP server, i might create a group >>>> 'microsoft.public.knitting'. If anyone wants to configure their >>>> newsclient so it connects to my server to lurk or post to that group >>>> they can do so - if i let them. I will have the ability to filter/censor >>>> any posts not related to knitting, or if i so choose filter any post >>>> that are. It wouldn't be running on 'msnews.microsoft.com', or somehow >>>> pretending to, so how is that fostering fraud? >>>> >>>> >>> NO. Check the Law if it really interests you. Usenet is NOT above any >>> Law nor are the parties that use it. >> Maybe the 'Peoples' Counsel' should check the law himself, the US >> Supreme Court has already ruled that the Internet and Usenet is >> protected by the First Amendment. Is the 'Peoples' Counsel' not >> familiar with the challenge from the Church of Scientology? Do you >> remember what happened with that? Did they succeed in preventing the >> use of their name in newsgroup names? >> > > HAHAHAHA, wrong argument. > The case [and there are others] you mention deals with SPECIFIC issues > to the individual NOT the theft or fraud associated with attempting to > falsely portray being Microsoft *IN ITS OWN NEWSGROUPS*. You still don't get it because you still don't know how Usenet works. Earlier you were saying that there was a "master distribution" and that *all* posts had to pass by Microsoft servers. You just don't know how it works and anyone who knows you knows very well that you can never admit to being wrong, so you will just keep on arguing even when you are proven wrong. Microsoft doesn't own anything on Usenet and it can't tell other Usenet server operators how to organize their discussion groups. Ignorance is bliss so you must indeed be a very happy man. Bye!
From: MEB on 19 Dec 2009 13:14 On 12/19/2009 12:56 PM, MEB wrote: > On 12/19/2009 12:41 PM, John John - MVP wrote: >> MEB wrote: >>> On 12/18/2009 06:14 PM, Etal wrote: >>>> MEB wrote: >>>> >>>>> Etal wrote: >>>>>> ( Regarding "microsoft.public.it.windows7" ) >>>>>> >>>>>> Are corporations now disallowing humanity to organize its >>>>>> discussions in >>>>>> logical ways? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> It can do what it wishes, YOU on the other hand, have ZERO right to >>>>> use >>>>> Microsoft's microsoft.public. hierarchy. Call it anything you want, but >>>>> don't try to foster fraud by forging Microsoft's forums... which it >>>>> holds legal right to. >>>>> >>>> >>>> It (corporations) can do as it wishes on their own servers yes. And i >>>> guess we can agree that i have zero right to create or remove various >>>> newsgroups on their NNTP-servers. >>>> >>>> However, if i setup my own NNTP server, i might create a group >>>> 'microsoft.public.knitting'. If anyone wants to configure their >>>> newsclient so it connects to my server to lurk or post to that group >>>> they can do so - if i let them. I will have the ability to filter/censor >>>> any posts not related to knitting, or if i so choose filter any post >>>> that are. It wouldn't be running on 'msnews.microsoft.com', or somehow >>>> pretending to, so how is that fostering fraud? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> NO. Check the Law if it really interests you. Usenet is NOT above any >>> Law nor are the parties that use it. >> >> Maybe the 'Peoples' Counsel' should check the law himself, the US >> Supreme Court has already ruled that the Internet and Usenet is >> protected by the First Amendment. Is the 'Peoples' Counsel' not >> familiar with the challenge from the Church of Scientology? Do you >> remember what happened with that? Did they succeed in preventing the >> use of their name in newsgroup names? >> > > HAHAHAHA, wrong argument. > The case [and there are others] you mention deals with SPECIFIC issues > to the individual NOT the theft or fraud associated with attempting to > falsely portray being Microsoft *IN ITS OWN NEWSGROUPS*. > Keep searching, direct your searches more towards property rights, and > rulings pursuant issues of theft, fraud, and the other that would and is > occurring by the false presentation of being Microsoft IN ITS OWN > NEWSGROUPS. > Oh, here is a copy of the questions posed to Microsoft earlier this morning: --- Original Message --- >From : *****@****.com Sent : Saturday, December 19, 2009 1:37:17 AM UTC To : CNTUS.GNCS.NA.00.EN.000.000.CS.CMR.CUS.00.WB(a)css.one.microsoft.com Subject : Microsoft's removal of newsgroups CONTACT INFORMATION First Name: Maurice Edward, Brahier PRODUCT Not Applicable QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS Message: LEGAL QUESTIONS: Whether Microsoft intends to allow Usenet to continue fostering the fraudulent continuance of the newsgroups recently removed, and whether Microsoft intends to allow its newsgroups microsoft.public. to be used in a manner inconsistent with its policies. Further, whether Microsoft intends to allow the false and distinctly fraudulent creation of newsgroups it has not created upon and within microsoft.public. news groups. -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking http://peoplescounsel.org The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government ___---
From: MEB on 19 Dec 2009 13:21 On 12/19/2009 01:06 PM, John John - MVP wrote: > MEB wrote: >> On 12/19/2009 12:41 PM, John John - MVP wrote: >>> MEB wrote: >>>> On 12/18/2009 06:14 PM, Etal wrote: >>>>> MEB wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Etal wrote: >>>>>>> ( Regarding "microsoft.public.it.windows7" ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are corporations now disallowing humanity to organize its >>>>>>> discussions in >>>>>>> logical ways? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> It can do what it wishes, YOU on the other hand, have ZERO right to >>>>>> use >>>>>> Microsoft's microsoft.public. hierarchy. Call it anything you >>>>>> want, but >>>>>> don't try to foster fraud by forging Microsoft's forums... which it >>>>>> holds legal right to. >>>>>> >>>>> It (corporations) can do as it wishes on their own servers yes. And i >>>>> guess we can agree that i have zero right to create or remove various >>>>> newsgroups on their NNTP-servers. >>>>> >>>>> However, if i setup my own NNTP server, i might create a group >>>>> 'microsoft.public.knitting'. If anyone wants to configure their >>>>> newsclient so it connects to my server to lurk or post to that group >>>>> they can do so - if i let them. I will have the ability to >>>>> filter/censor >>>>> any posts not related to knitting, or if i so choose filter any post >>>>> that are. It wouldn't be running on 'msnews.microsoft.com', or somehow >>>>> pretending to, so how is that fostering fraud? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> NO. Check the Law if it really interests you. Usenet is NOT above any >>>> Law nor are the parties that use it. >>> Maybe the 'Peoples' Counsel' should check the law himself, the US >>> Supreme Court has already ruled that the Internet and Usenet is >>> protected by the First Amendment. Is the 'Peoples' Counsel' not >>> familiar with the challenge from the Church of Scientology? Do you >>> remember what happened with that? Did they succeed in preventing the >>> use of their name in newsgroup names? >>> >> >> HAHAHAHA, wrong argument. >> The case [and there are others] you mention deals with SPECIFIC issues >> to the individual NOT the theft or fraud associated with attempting to >> falsely portray being Microsoft *IN ITS OWN NEWSGROUPS*. > > You still don't get it because you still don't know how Usenet works. > Earlier you were saying that there was a "master distribution" and that > *all* posts had to pass by Microsoft servers. You just don't know how > it works and anyone who knows you knows very well that you can never > admit to being wrong, so you will just keep on arguing even when you are > proven wrong. Microsoft doesn't own anything on Usenet and it can't > tell other Usenet server operators how to organize their discussion > groups. Ignorance is bliss so you must indeed be a very happy man. > > Bye! WRONG. The distinct intention is to defraud Microsoft and the world into the false belief the newsgroup "microsoft.public.it.windows7" is, in fact, from Microsoft. There IS NO support for this fraud. As I previously stated, the individual HAS the right to create other similar newsgroups, such as the alt.windows98 that this is being CROSS-POSTED TO. NO ONE has the right to intentionally and falsely portray being Microsoft. -- MEB http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking http://peoplescounsel.org The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government ___---
From: 98 Guy on 19 Dec 2009 14:24
Full-Quoter MEB wrote: > here is a copy of the questions posed to Microsoft earlier this > morning: > > To: > CNTUS.GNCS.NA.00.EN.000.000.CS.CMR.CUS.00.WB(a)css.one.microsoft.com Where the hell did you find that e-mail address? |