Dear Nick,
thanks for your contributions against freedom of speech: my wonder, remember the "?", based on facts. It is also nice to see that big companies have always good defenders whatever they can do.
--- El vie, 6/11/09, Nick Cox <[email protected]> escribió:
> De: Nick Cox <[email protected]>
> Asunto: RE: st: AW: Stata 10 is Malware (also version 11?)
> Para: [email protected]
> Fecha: viernes, 6 de noviembre, 2009 12:46
> 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
> [email protected]
>
>
> 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 <[email protected]>
> escribió:
>
> > De: Nick Cox <[email protected]>
> > Asunto: RE: st: AW: Stata 10 is Malware (also version
> 11?)
> > Para: [email protected]
> > 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
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
> > 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/
>
*
* 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/
