# Solved: I present my apologizes !



## Chicon (Jul 29, 2004)

Dear members,

I present my apologizes for having broken the rules of this forum about piracy.
I promise it won't happen again.

Joe


----------



## Guyzer (Jul 3, 2004)

You are a good man Joe.:up:


----------



## Chicon (Jul 29, 2004)

Wimpy369 said:


> You are a good man Joe.:up:


Thanks, Wimpy369 ! :up:


----------



## Stoner (Oct 26, 2002)

You're OK in my book, too..... Joe


----------



## Chicon (Jul 29, 2004)

Stoner said:


> You're OK in my book, too..... Joe


Thanks, Stoner ! You too are OK in my book ! :up:


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

We'll let you off the hook this time, but I have the thumbscrews ready for any future infractions.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

I missed the thread, but we always appreciate it when everyone is cooperative and understanding 

Happy Holidays


----------



## dr911 (Sep 21, 2005)

We all make "mistakes"....we'll only human (at least most of us). A "Time-Out" for JOE.


----------



## gotrootdude (Feb 19, 2003)

Wow.. I would have made the same, or similar mistake..


----------



## Kharma (Dec 15, 2005)

I am sorry for any violations I may have caused, yes i should have read the rules first. i just wanted to extract my pictures from a slideshow, Iwill be more careful next time. I am sorry Chicon for any trouble I may have caused you.


----------



## Chicon (Jul 29, 2004)

Kharma said:


> I am sorry for any violations I may have caused, yes i should have read the rules first. i just wanted to extract my pictures from a slideshow, Iwill be more careful next time. I am sorry Chicon for any trouble I may have caused you.


:up: I really appreciate it !


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Kharma said:


> I am sorry for any violations I may have caused, yes i should have read the rules first. i just wanted to extract my pictures from a slideshow, Iwill be more careful next time. I am sorry Chicon for any trouble I may have caused you.


You did read the rules now, right?


----------



## Kharma (Dec 15, 2005)

Yes I did, this time. Kharma will be much better behaved in the future.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Can we mark this thread solved?


----------



## Skivvywaver (Mar 18, 2001)

AcaCandy said:


> Can we mark this thread solved?


 I'd figure so Candy. We all know I have never "tested" the waters don't we?

Way to own up Chicon. I have done "things" I shouldn't have also. That happens when I let my feelings type and hit enter with the left big toe that is protruding from my mouth.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Who? You? 


Never


----------



## Skivvywaver (Mar 18, 2001)

I still owe you for not using your ban stick on me. Even if I never do nuffin wrong.


----------



## Stoner (Oct 26, 2002)

Me too .......................


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

I have a hard time keeping up with my bad boys


----------



## dr911 (Sep 21, 2005)

I never....never cause any trouble !!!! 

Really....does'nt anybody believe me.........he...... he.... he !!!


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Aren't you back in Vegas yet????


----------



## dr911 (Sep 21, 2005)

No.......I'm in the process of selling my condo there........I'm looking @ nothern Ariz. 
Too many people in Vegas now.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Northern AZ?  It snows there 

I assume you have your condo listed. Real estate is hot hot hot here now......I sold a house in the nick of time last year


----------



## gotrootdude (Feb 19, 2003)

I've seen many post such as the one you replied too, where the legality or forum rule breaking was semi questionable.. There are times when a hex editor, or a resource stripper, or the like, come in very useful for legitimate reasons.
But, it's hard to tell, sometimes, whether the person who asked the question has a legitimate reason.. I guess that's why the forum has the anti-hacking rule, to cover such posts.. JohnWill does a excellent job of keeping this place from becoming a hack convention, and keeping us blabbermouths, who speak sometimes without thinking, under control.. He's caught me close to the edge a few times..  I think AcaCandy may have caught me once or twice as well.  

I think it's great to have such a "clean" forum, when it seems like most other forums on the net openingly discuss such tools and actions without regard to legality..

PS.. Someone please help TechGuy get the spell checker fixed before the grammer police step in..


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

gotrootdude said:


> PS.. Someone please help TechGuy get the spell checker fixed before the grammer police step in..


Grammar


----------



## Moby (Mar 19, 2002)

And full stops (periods) are singular.


----------



## Skivvywaver (Mar 18, 2001)

Moby said:


> And full stops (periods) are singular.


 Busted. LOL, it is fixed Gotroot...........I ain't never evr gonna use it tough, me spells an uses purfacts gramner.


----------



## Anon23 (Mar 18, 2005)

This might stir up trouble. But are you sure what he asked was illegal. You cannot label things by process to shoiw whether it fits the legal definitions that determine if it is or not. Can you? You could look for or make a sticky of the actual law so people can tell how to not violate it. I bet there arent as many things that are illegal as you think. And there are different legal standings for software you own. They go beyond the contract you sign and always override it i think. Its not that simple to say something is illegal when comes to this. And Is that cracking? If you generalize things, if you are, everytyhing you do will seem ilegal if it doesnt already. Even if its not. We shouldnt go around saying things are illegal if they arent. Thats how bad things happen. Very bad things. Its always safe to examine to see if it is though!!

to clarify the earlier part. The law, and contracts are designed by automatically including ealier things that are not mentioned in them. You have to look from the top of the law down to understand it. Thats how contracts are written and how congress and all law writing bodies in this country write law. If they dont, THEY are breaking the law. literally.

I'm pretty sure in the end, legally, the law always goes to the person owning the computer. Because the software is useless without it and as you should know its designed to not even interfere with the ownters hardware or computers health. The computer comes before the software in standing. That means access is more important. If i'm not mistaken.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Might I simply suggest a review of the first post in this thread.

The poster speaks about forum rules. You can review them at the top of the forum by selecting Forum Rules. 

Also, is the spell checker not working again? 

You speak of legally, and the law, if you aren't a lawyer, you probably should refrain. If you are a lawyer, I'd suggest you contact Microsoft and ask them what their take is on that matter 

Happy Holidays


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Anon23 said:


> This might stir up trouble. But are you sure what he asked was illegal --- snip ---


It really doesn't matter if it's truly illegal, since some thing that are not allowed by our forum rules are perfectly legal. What matters is that it's against the forum rules.


----------



## Kharma (Dec 15, 2005)

Whoo fellas calm down. I thought this was over. I just have to do with out the pictures. In the from of being legal; I had pictures taken by an amateur photographer, they used some program to give me a slideshow of the pics, the person left town, the slide show only had a disk life of 30 days. I can't find the photographer to get the pictures and just wanted to show them for the holidays. So if asking how to view them was a violation of forum rules I once again apologize.


----------



## Anon23 (Mar 18, 2005)

Sorry, i thought the forum rules were based on wether it was legal or not. So i though maybe you didnt even have to worry aobut that. And It would broaden ways you can give support. If you wrote that you can't crack, and it's not cracking, you can do more than you thought to give support and have one more situation not to worry about it in general. I thought you would enjoy the thought. 8)

If its not illegal and your rule is based on if its illegal you can, simply, not worry about it, and you can tell anyone who says its illegal they are nuts and correct something people do wrong alot today. Don't worry. i only said it because i thought it would benefit your forum. Sorry!


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

We still don't know that this was, in fact, piracy. Its entirely possible that the amateur photographer gave Kharma ownership of the photos. If not, Kharma may have fair use rights to access the photos. Its impossible to say whether or not it is "illegal" to do so without knowing half the details. Maybe there's a copyright notice on the photos or file that says who actually owns them.


----------



## ~Candy~ (Jan 27, 2001)

Kharma said:


> Whoo fellas calm down. I thought this was over. I just have to do with out the pictures. In the from of being legal; I had pictures taken by an amateur photographer, they used some program to give me a slideshow of the pics, the person left town, the slide show only had a disk life of 30 days. I can't find the photographer to get the pictures and just wanted to show them for the holidays. So if asking how to view them was a violation of forum rules I once again apologize.


Kharma, please don't take offense at our latest replies. They weren't directed at you.

I'd be interested in seeing the properties of the .exe. If you right click on it, then go to version, you'll see a company name listed there.

brendan, I don't think the issue was the right to the photos, unless I missed something. I think it was disassembly of an .exe file which could and probably does belong to a corporation.


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

brendandonhu said:


> We still don't know that this was, in fact, piracy. Its entirely possible that the amateur photographer gave Kharma ownership of the photos. If not, Kharma may have fair use rights to access the photos. Its impossible to say whether or not it is "illegal" to do so without knowing half the details. Maybe there's a copyright notice on the photos or file that says who actually owns them.


That's right, it's impossible to know if it's legal. We also have rules against assisting in hacking activities, which this certainly seems to fall under. Since you don't have a dog in this fight, may I suggest you retire to the sidelines?


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

If reverse-engineering any file is "hacking", we need to close all threads about resource editors, hex editors, and decompilers. If Kharma does own these photos, how exactly is it hacking to extract them from a file?


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

Kharma said:


> Whoo fellas calm down. I thought this was over. I just have to do with out the pictures. In the from of being legal; I had pictures taken by an amateur photographer, they used some program to give me a slideshow of the pics, the person left town, the slide show only had a disk life of 30 days. I can't find the photographer to get the pictures and just wanted to show them for the holidays. So if asking how to view them was a violation of forum rules I once again apologize.


What you're asking is certainly not illegal if you really own the rights to the pictures. OTOH, assisting in activities like this helps people that would want to illegally extract copyrighted works, that's the point. I suspect the application that only had a shelf life of 30 days was a trial of some sort, and cracking that would certainly be aginst the forum rules.

BTW, this is over, because I'm going to close the thread, it's purpose has long since been served. I have no issue with you, since as you say, you do have the rights to the pictures. Sorry we couldn't help you this time.


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

brendandonhu said:


> If reverse-engineering any file is "hacking", we need to close all threads about resource editors, hex editors, and decompilers. If Kharma does own these photos, how exactly is it hacking to extract them from a file?


He obviously doen't own the application that was used to display them and that's the issue. Cracking the application, which is obviously some sort of a trial, is against the forum rules. I asked you once before to butt out, please don't keep trying my patience.  You like to push things to the limit, it could be a disappointment if you find you went too far.


----------

