M
messagedog
maybe, we may together study windows sourcecode.
and u?
if u need,u may download in http://activex.126.com/
and u?
if u need,u may download in http://activex.126.com/
Dmitriy Lapshin said:Don't you know it's absolutely illegal? Not only to study the code, but even
to download and share it.
Microsoft is very serious about it, so you'd better remove the code from
your hard disk and from the website .
--
Dmitriy Lapshin [C# / .NET MVP]
X-Unity Test Studio
http://www.x-unity.net/teststudio.aspx
Bring the power of unit testing to VS .NET IDE
messagedog said:maybe, we may together study windows sourcecode.
and u?
if u need,u may download in http://activex.126.com/
illegal to copy things without permission, and offhand I don't think you can
read this one without copying it, because of the way the Internet works.
Michael A. Covington said:Actually, under copyright law, it is never illegal to read anything. It is
illegal to copy things without permission, and offhand I don't think you can
read this one without copying it, because of the way the Internet works.
My real concern is that this web link might be something entirely different.
Why should we believe this guy who says it is Microsoft source code?
Dmitriy Lapshin said:Don't you know it's absolutely illegal? Not only to study the code, but even
to download and share it.
Microsoft is very serious about it, so you'd better remove the code from
your hard disk and from the website .
--
Dmitriy Lapshin [C# / .NET MVP]
X-Unity Test Studio
http://www.x-unity.net/teststudio.aspx
Bring the power of unit testing to VS .NET IDE
messagedog said:maybe, we may together study windows sourcecode.
and u?
if u need,u may download in http://activex.126.com/
Dmitriy said:I am not a lawyer, still I would suggest the Win2K sources are protected not
only by copyright laws, but also by intellectual property laws. So, there is
no reason for a law-abiding person to even go to check what this web link
contains.
Jesse McGrew said:I'm not a lawyer either, but I've never heard of "intellectual property
laws" as anything separate from copyright, patent, and trademark laws.
IOW, "intellectual property" just refers to the intellectual works that
are protected by various laws.
And downloading might not even be a violation of copyright. I'm not
aware of any U.S. courts ruling on the issue, but the Canadian courts
recently declared that downloading music doesn't violate copyright, only
uploading (i.e. distributing copies) does.
Michael said:There are a few laws that protect trade secrets too. I'm not sure of the
particulars.
I wouldn't assume that court decision is going to hold up. Downloading does
cause a copy to be created.