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

[Marcello Pagano <pagano@hsph.harvard.edu>]

OK this is now getting personal.  Nothing new of value has been added to 
the discussion in the last few rounds.
You may consider this as contributing against freedom of speech, then so 
be it.  When one party hides behind a
fake name to defend piracy, then I think we have been more than fair in 
listening this long.

Let us call an end to this discussion on this list, please, unless 
StataCorp want to defend themselves.

m.p.



Demo Crazy wrote:
> 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 <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 12:46
> > 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 
> > 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/