Statalist


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: st: AW: Stata 10 is Malware (also version 11?)


From   "Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>
To   <statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu>
Subject   RE: st: AW: Stata 10 is Malware (also version 11?)
Date   Fri, 6 Nov 2009 12:46:18 -0000

I have absolutely no legal expertise. If I had then I would not be expressing legal views on your assertions in an email forum. That would be inappropriate, indeed unprofessional.

I would seriously advise to consider whether comments like yours are not libellous, leaving you open to legal action in one or more countries. 

Beyond that I consider that only StataCorp can comment authoritatively on the actions of StataCorp, but that's at their discretion. 

If you have an issue with StataCorp, take it up with them directly. Expect them to want to hear information and reasoned argument, not insinuation and abuse. 

Otherwise I will not contribute further comments in this thread. 

Nick 
n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk 

Demo Crazy

You understand it perfectly, but you say only part of the truth (is not this called falacy?)

(1) honest users do not know what other malware is hiding Stata Corp.

(2) Why do you only focus on the user and not on Stata Corp.? they are not only dishonest but criminals. Please review regulations and tell me if Stata Corp can legally behaves like that.... How difficult it is to add a notice about what a dishonest user can expect!


--- El vie, 6/11/09, Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> escribió:

> De: Nick Cox <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk>
> Asunto: RE: st: AW: Stata 10 is Malware (also version 11?)
> Para: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
> Fecha: viernes, 6 de noviembre, 2009 12:21
> I understand you to be saying that if
> you knowingly use an invalid
> license number then Stata doesn't behave. 
> 
> In essence, I regard that as very good news for the honest.
> Many thanks
> for sharing it with us! 
> 
> Nick 
> n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk
> 
> 
> Demo Crazy
> 
> It is *legal* to have a *legal* copy AND a *legal* serial,
> isn't it?
> Because that is what I have ... 
> (I thought it is perfectly clear for any average IQ person
> from my
> message that it was what I meant when I said I bought a
> copy of Stata,
> since any *legal* copy of Stata from Stata Corp. includes a
> *legal*
> serial, isn't it?
> 
> My point is that Stata includes undocumented malware. Stata
> guys say
> that bad behaviour comes from other guys modifying their
> the program.
> But this is NOT true because my *original* copy from them
> behaves in
> that undocumented way when an invalid license is provided,
> without 
> 
> I guess that killing a killer is, in principle, not legal.
> Maybe your
> laws allow it but with some clear procedures.... In this
> case, cracking
> a cracker is ILEGAL (=malware) unless you clearly make this
> well-known.
> 
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> *   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
> 
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> *   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
> 


      

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/



© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index