This is to clarify the "abandonware" issue.

[Graham Banks]

Harvey - I think I just deleted a post of yours in error. Either that or you removed it.
If it was my error I apologise.

In answer to your question, Albert pretty much stated what I had.

Regards, Graham.

[Graham Banks]

Is Albert Silver against piracy?

Of course he is as you've been told many times both here and in private.
Why continue to harrass him? "Stalking" another member is not acceptable.

Regards, Graham.

[Harvey Williamson]

Is Albert Silver against piracy?

Of course he is as you've been told many times both here and in private.
Why continue to harrass him? "Stalking" another member is not acceptable.

Regards, Graham.

I have been told it - I have never seen him say it in public. I have him in writing saying it is ok to crack Hiarcs I will end this here as you are becoming his spokesman again.

NP with the accidental delete - i think it was me!

[Albert Silver]

Albert,

The Charter is not 'crystal' about piracy as you suggest so I give you 1 last chance to make your views crystal.

It is crystal clear in fact, and I feel no need whatsoever to clarify my views. I think that if there had been doubt as to where I stood, I would not have been elected. Feel free to bring this up day in and day out here, just don't confuse can't with won't. If however, I find myself up for election as a mod, I will answer this question should it finally let you sleep at night.

Regarding the charter: the part on 'doubtful legal status' is to ensure that not only are all 'CLEARLY illegal posts' removed, but that those of doubtful nature as well.

Albert

Albert,

You are wrong ask Graham why he had to reinstate Chinmay.

Harvey

I have no idea what you are talking about. Who is Chinmay?

Albert

[Albert Silver]

Is Albert Silver against piracy?

Of course he is as you've been told many times both here and in private.
Why continue to harrass him? "Stalking" another member is not acceptable.

Regards, Graham.

I have been told it - I have never seen him say it in public. I have him in writing saying it is ok to crack Hiarcs

That isn't the way it happened, but of course you know it.

When the crack was offered, it was for a program that the lawful user could not get to work due to a defunct protection scheme, and there was as yet no alternative. Your offer (and thus Mark's) came after my comments, and not long before, you had even posted a request for the first 1-2 versions of Hiarcs as even Mark's copies were apparently unusable. This seemed to suggest that a solution was very unlikely.

So when asked about this, I said that under the circumstances (meaning no way for the person to use their legally purchased program) a crack was a practical solution. Once you (and thus Mark) said that there was no problem and it would be resolved, the 'crack solution' stopped being acceptable, and I no longer defended it.

As to my making public statements for you, it is as the saying goes, "It will be a cold day in Hell...."

Albert

[Dave McClain]

That, Hiarcs case, is precisely a case where an interested part calls the law in his support.
Abadonned ware supposes, in its logic, an ausence of that call.
When there is abandon, law dos not intervene.
When law does not intervene, law is like nonexistant at all.
BTW, a ship wreck not aslways is a hazard. If sunk, it is not.

oceanic regards
Fernando

Fern,

You are not paying attention: I said "abandoned," not wrecked or sunk. No where have I seen that H3 is "abandoned," therefore Uniacke still owns it.

[Harvey Williamson]

Albert,

The Charter is not 'crystal' about piracy as you suggest so I give you 1 last chance to make your views crystal.

It is crystal clear in fact, and I feel no need whatsoever to clarify my views. I think that if there had been doubt as to where I stood, I would not have been elected. Feel free to bring this up day in and day out here, just don't confuse can't with won't. If however, I find myself up for election as a mod, I will answer this question should it finally let you sleep at night.

Regarding the charter: the part on 'doubtful legal status' is to ensure that not only are all 'CLEARLY illegal posts' removed, but that those of doubtful nature as well.

Albert

Albert,

You are wrong ask Graham why he had to reinstate Chinmay.

Harvey

I have no idea what you are talking about. Who is Chinmay?

Albert

Chinmay is someone who was banned and reinstated during your time as a moderator. He was banned for Piracy and then reinstated as the the Charter is not Crystal regarding this issue. As I suggest why dont you ask Graham - or read your own secret forum as I am sure it was all there at the time.

[Harvey Williamson]

Is Albert Silver against piracy?

Of course he is as you've been told many times both here and in private.
Why continue to harrass him? "Stalking" another member is not acceptable.

Regards, Graham.

I have been told it - I have never seen him say it in public. I have him in writing saying it is ok to crack Hiarcs

That isn't the way it happened, but of course you know it.

When the crack was offered, it was for a program that the lawful user could not get to work due to a defunct protection scheme, and there was as yet no alternative. Your offer (and thus Mark's) came after my comments, and not long before, you had even posted a request for the first 1-2 versions of Hiarcs as even Mark's copies were apparently unusable. This seemed to suggest that a solution was very unlikely.

So when asked about this, I said that under the circumstances (meaning no way for the person to use their legally purchased program) a crack was a practical solution. Once you (and thus Mark) said that there was no problem and it would be resolved, the 'crack solution' stopped being acceptable, and I no longer defended it.

As to my making public statements for you, it is as the saying goes, "It will be a cold day in Hell...."

Albert

I asked for a working copy of Hiarcs 1 only. Your comments were about Hiarcs 3. Even if I asked for Hiarcs 11 - why do you think that gives you the right to crack it.


Here is an extract from what you said:

Hiarcs is currently at version 11.1. Version 3 came out close to 15 years ago. It is so old and weak, that the Hiarcs team announced they would be offering it for free download in UCI version. To claim this is jeopardized because Franz suggested a cracked version to help you with your match is just ridiculous. Version 3 represents no commercial value, and even if this cracked version were 'leaked' to every pirate site on the planet, how many people do you honestly think would actually install and use this DOS program?

[Tony Thomas]

Hiarcs is currently at version 11.1. Version 3 came out close to 15 years ago. It is so old and weak, that the Hiarcs team announced they would be offering it for free download in UCI version. To claim this is jeopardized because Franz suggested a cracked version to help you with your match is just ridiculous. Version 3 represents no commercial value, and even if this cracked version were 'leaked' to every pirate site on the planet, how many people do you honestly think would actually install and use this DOS program?

Harvey, bro, I think you should let it go. It doesnt look like Albert supports piracy, the stuff he wrote looks like something I would write, that doesnt necessarily means I support cloners.

[Harvey Williamson]

Hiarcs is currently at version 11.1. Version 3 came out close to 15 years ago. It is so old and weak, that the Hiarcs team announced they would be offering it for free download in UCI version. To claim this is jeopardized because Franz suggested a cracked version to help you with your match is just ridiculous. Version 3 represents no commercial value, and even if this cracked version were 'leaked' to every pirate site on the planet, how many people do you honestly think would actually install and use this DOS program?

Harvey, bro, I think you should let it go. It doesnt look like Albert supports piracy, the stuff he wrote looks like something I would write, that doesnt necessarily means I support cloners.

I don't intend to post on it anymore.