Bitcoin Forum
March 28, 2024, 09:54:16 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 26.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 [1139] 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 ... 1993 »
  Print  
Author Topic: NEM (XEM) Official Thread - 100% New Code - Easy To Use APIs  (Read 2983950 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
LemonAndFriesOne
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 02:42:49 AM
 #22761

It doesn't mean Microsoft would own NEM. It just doesn't guys, so you can stop posting all the Microsoft fine print. 

Then why do you supposed a mega corporation has interest in an open source project that is crowdfunded and could very well be a huge competitor in the future?

Don't forget how they have been brought up on claims of becoming a monopoly and buying out early start ups before.

Don't forget how Windows 10 is free but on the cost of sending your information back to central servers for who knows what.

Ok, so you're guessing.

So their plot is to steal all the altcoins?

No

Guessing? There's documents of the monopoly charges that have been raised against this corporation, even Europe has sued them for doing this.

A quick google search will show you.

Here let me help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.

This has nothing to do with it. Stay on track

Let me guess, let's not fathom a mega corporation trying to take out potential future competitors, instead let's focus on temporary satisfaction of having a quick P&D for being listed with Azure instead of thinking about the possible long term benefits of a project like NEM succeeding on its own.


I have NEMs long term future in mind. But that has nothing to do with this.

You are paranoid.

Monopoly - sure
Trying to steal the altcoins - ridiculous

What the hell? It's just not the play going on here with azure. LOL

I don't think you read right, I never said they are trying to steal the altcoins. Maybe patent and control the tech behind them, yes. Not steal them. Go back and read where I mentioned that, you will find none.
There is enough scammers in cryptoworld already doing that.  Roll Eyes
1711619656
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711619656

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711619656
Reply with quote  #2

1711619656
Report to moderator
Even if you use Bitcoin through Tor, the way transactions are handled by the network makes anonymity difficult to achieve. Do not expect your transactions to be anonymous unless you really know what you're doing.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1711619656
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711619656

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711619656
Reply with quote  #2

1711619656
Report to moderator
1711619656
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711619656

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711619656
Reply with quote  #2

1711619656
Report to moderator
1711619656
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1711619656

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1711619656
Reply with quote  #2

1711619656
Report to moderator
apullman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 44
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 02:50:33 AM
 #22762

Can we just use the pay as you go plan without signing a agreement?
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/
https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/tag/baas/

I would be wary of Microsoft too. As with all big corporate entities, EULA's and T&C's are written for their best interest.

On a related note, it is crazy the amount of personal data Microsoft collects. It is written to basically cover anything one would do on a pc.
This is from the January 2016 Microsoft Privacy Statement
https://privacy.microsoft.com/en-us/privacystatement/

"Personal Data We Collect"
"We collect your first and last name, email address, postal address, phone number, and other similar contact data."

"We collect passwords, password hints, and similar security information used for authentication and account access."

"We collect data about you such as your age, gender, country and preferred language."

"We collect data about your interests and favorites, such as the teams you follow in a sports app, the stocks you track in a finance app, or the favorite cities you add..."

"We collect data necessary to process your payment if you make purchases, such as your payment instrument number (such as a credit card number), and the security code..."

"We collect data about how you and your device interact with our services. This includes data, such as the features you use, the items you purchase, the web pages you visit, and the search terms you enter..."

"We collect data about your contacts and relationships if you use a Microsoft service to manage contacts, or to communicate or interact with other people or organizations."

"We collect data about your location, which can be either precise or imprecise. Precise location data can be Global Position System (GPS) data, as well as data identifying nearby..."

"We collect content of your files and communications when necessary to provide you with the services you use. For example, if you receive an email using Outlook.com, we need..."

"We also collect the content of messages you send to us, such as feedback and product reviews you write, or questions and information you provide for customer support..."

"Reasons We Share Personal Data"
"We share your personal data with your consent or as necessary..."

It does not say you will be asked for your consent, it seems to be stated indirectly that you consent to it.

Windows 10 privacy settings. Sad
https://imgur.com/l0xUUo4
Microove
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 69
Merit: 0


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 02:53:45 AM
 #22763

We wait jabo38
Do have answer from Microsoft first

Indeed, things may be changing along the road.
yshin365new
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 289
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 03:44:23 AM
 #22764

We wait jabo38
Do have answer from Microsoft first

Indeed, things may be changing along the road.

Glad to see NEM community is full of energy and heat.  Smiley
patmast3r
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1001


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 06:16:09 AM
 #22765

There is nothing in the agreement that suggests that they would own NEM or gain any rights other than on the code that we submit. As is clearly stated. We submit jack shit. 0 lines of actual NEM code is being submitted.

I'm not a legal expert but so far I haven't heard anyone clearly explain what sections of the agreement would grant microsofts rights to actual NEM code and why. Don't say you're not a legal expert so you shouldn't make assumptions. If you guys are all lawyers than explain some stuff to us and maybe we won't think you're paranoid anymore.

You guys just keep pointing out sections. Those sections don't sound problematic to most people because they only seem to entail the code we submit. Which again is very little and not at all related to actual code of NIS.

Anyway, we're never all going to agree so we might as well stop discussing it.


patmast3r
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1001


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 07:02:29 AM
 #22766

There is nothing in the agreement that suggests that they would own NEM or gain any rights other than on the code that we submit. As is clearly stated. We submit jack shit. 0 lines of actual NEM code is being submitted.

I'm not a legal expert but so far I haven't heard anyone clearly explain what sections of the agreement would grant microsofts rights to actual NEM code and why. Don't say you're not a legal expert so you shouldn't make assumptions. If you guys are all lawyers than explain some stuff to us and maybe we won't think you're paranoid anymore.

You guys just keep pointing out sections. Those sections don't sound problematic to most people because they only seem to entail the code we submit. Which again is very little and not at all related to actual code of NIS.

Anyway, we're never all going to agree so we might as well stop discussing it.



*removing useless quote of the cla*

“Project”
means any of the projects owned or managed by Microsoft and offered under a license
approved by the Open Source Initiative (www.opensource.org).

Sounds to me like the moment you Submit Code to their Azure platform (the Project) they own you. They use words like Code and Submit to cover the entire project, it's capitalized because it refers to the definitions given in the agreement. If it was as simple as you claim it to be, there wouldn't be a problem indeed, unfortunately it's not that simple. Would be nice to have some confirmation from a laywer indeed.  Smiley

The project is Azure.
The moment you submit code they own that particular code. Since the code is almost nothing I'd be fine with that.

McDoxy1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 07:05:47 AM
 #22767

Sounds to me like the moment you Submit Code to their Azure platform (the Project) they own you. They use words like Code and Submit to cover the entire project, it's capitalized because it refers to the definitions given in the agreement. If it was as simple as you claim it to be, there wouldn't be a problem indeed, unfortunately it's not that simple. Would be nice to have some confirmation from a laywer indeed.  Smiley

No it doesn't cover the entire project. The definitions are also quite clear. With "Project" they refer to the project you are contributing to, namely Microsoft Azure, and the code your are submitting are just a few templates.

I have no idea how you can interpret this into it. Also it just wouldn't make any sense, because everybody can submit templates to Azure. They don't have to be actively involved with NEM or whatever crypto. A random person could just submit a few templates and Microsoft would own NEM? Sry, not buying it.

This would also mean that Microsoft now owns WordPress, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Redis, CakePHP, Django, C#, Node.js, PHP, Python, Ruby,... fucking Java? I think Oracle would have a word to say about that.
b1007
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 404
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 07:20:10 AM
 #22768

Sounds to me like the moment you Submit Code to their Azure platform (the Project) they own you. They use words like Code and Submit to cover the entire project, it's capitalized because it refers to the definitions given in the agreement. If it was as simple as you claim it to be, there wouldn't be a problem indeed, unfortunately it's not that simple. Would be nice to have some confirmation from a laywer indeed.  Smiley

No it doesn't cover the entire project. The definitions are also quite clear. With "Project" they refer to the project you are contributing to, namely Microsoft Azure, and the code your are submitting are just a few templates.

I have no idea how you can interpret this into it. Also it just wouldn't make any sense, because everybody can submit templates to Azure. They don't have to be actively involved with NEM or whatever crypto. A random person could just submit a few templates and Microsoft would own NEM? Sry, not buying it.

This would also mean that Microsoft now owns WordPress, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Redis, CakePHP, Django, C#, Node.js, PHP, Python, Ruby,... fucking Java? I think Oracle would have a word to say about that.

Maybe I wasn't quite nuanced, but see my last post, I think there is reason to be suspicious.

I like to speculate
nzminer
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1918
Merit: 1001



View Profile
March 30, 2016, 07:33:05 AM
 #22769

My advice is this:

Do we need Azure?

Secondly, if we do jump on board, i say this - SEEK LEGAL ADVICE FIRST.
And i mean professional, solid legal advice from more than one lawyer experienced in the field.

NEM, THE SECURE, SCALABLE BLOCKCHAIN [NEM.IO] [T.ME/NEMRED]
McDoxy1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 07:36:05 AM
 #22770

Firstly, whatever gets submitted on Azure ever is theirs, not just code, everything, except the conversations that are marked as "not a submission". I don't know whether that's something NEM can afford, I think you know a lot more about that than I do.

We are just submitting templates (some shell scripts). Why wouldn't that be something we can afford?

Secondly, the terminology is phrased in such a way that it might not be just the "Code" (everything that is being submitted on Azure", but also everything related to Code since it includes any "associated documentation" (which could possibly be the entire project).

No, just wrong.
You don't seem like you are a developer so let me explain to you what associated documentation means. It's a document which explains what the code does, for instance lists each individual function in the code and explains what it does. Nothing more. Plus it would have to be submitted with the code.


Also, again ... everybody can submit templates, they don't have to be associated with the project.
rockethead
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1059
Merit: 1016


View Profile WWW
March 30, 2016, 09:34:07 AM
 #22771

Tldr;

This matter has been sought with two lawyers. Both think that it is at best ambiguous, which ties in very much with my conclusion. We can argue until the cows come home, but as one who has been around in business for the longest time and have seen many more agreements in my life, I have no doubt in my mind that the agreement was structured for their benefit, i.e., ambiguous enough to turn things around when they want to.

If NEM was a shit coin, they won't care. But if NEM becomes a hot property, that is when NEM will be slaughtered using this agreement.

Please refrain from saying that if Ethereum did that then, there shouldn't be a problem. I would say that is what 99% of the population will think. I belong to the 1% who will look specifically at the problem without trying to be influenced by anything else.

The problem here is the agreement and how all this is structured, not whether Ethereum has signed or not. Good luck to them. The agreement is explicit enough to show ambiguity.

Please do not conclude in what you want to believe it to be. If your command of law lexicon and innuendos is absent, don't even contemplate on making any conclusion.

In the absence of any legal knowledge, the power of your English Language is important. And in law, the use of the language is so important that you need to really understand beyond what a simple word can mean, and how this very word should be read in its entirety, within the context of the agreement.

In the context of the entire agreement, the Project can be called NEM and in the context of the entire agreement, it can mean to say that MS can take full rights of it, i.e., NEM to be given away free. You can argue about it, but the ambiguity is there. If there is ambiguity, there is room for exploitation, and exploit they will.

I only need to ask one question. If they are sincere, then let's make it very clear. If not, I do not believe the agreement is done in all sincerity.

The fact that we write pages about this shows its ambiguity. It is so easy to judge from what has transpired in the last couple of days.

McDoxy1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 09:47:22 AM
 #22772

 Roll Eyes

What happens if a random person not actively involved with NEM submits templates? Does MS own NEM then? That could happen any day, because anyone can submit templates.
rockethead
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1059
Merit: 1016


View Profile WWW
March 30, 2016, 09:49:21 AM
 #22773

Roll Eyes

What happens if a random person not actively involved with NEM submits templates? Does MS own NEM then? That could happen any day, because anyone can submit templates.

Technically, if you look at the agreement, he has breached it. He is in trouble.
jabo38
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1001


mining is so 2012-2013


View Profile WWW
March 30, 2016, 09:50:13 AM
 #22774

We wait jabo38
Do have answer from Microsoft first

Thank you for waiting. I'm still waiting for an answer to help us understand and add to the other information we are gathering.

McDoxy1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 134
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 09:53:16 AM
 #22775

Roll Eyes

What happens if a random person not actively involved with NEM submits templates? Does MS own NEM then? That could happen any day, because anyone can submit templates.

Technically, if you look at the agreement, he has breached it. He is in trouble.

I did, nowhere does it say that.
You have to have the rights to the code you submit (which are the templates).
The "Employer" passages are for the cases where you are an employee for a company and your employer owns the code you write, so you need persmission. Someone who doesn't work for NEM and codes his own templates didn't violate the agreement.
Thingamajig
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 497
Merit: 501


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 01:04:52 PM
Last edit: March 30, 2016, 01:29:14 PM by Thingamajig
 #22776

Tldr;

This matter has been sought with two lawyers. Both think that it is at best ambiguous, which ties in very much with my conclusion. We can argue until the cows come home, but as one who has been around in business for the longest time and have seen many more agreements in my life, I have no doubt in my mind that the agreement was structured for their benefit, i.e., ambiguous enough to turn things around when they want to.

If NEM was a shit coin, they won't care. But if NEM becomes a hot property, that is when NEM will be slaughtered using this agreement.

Please refrain from saying that if Ethereum did that then, there shouldn't be a problem. I would say that is what 99% of the population will think. I belong to the 1% who will look specifically at the problem without trying to be influenced by anything else.

The problem here is the agreement and how all this is structured, not whether Ethereum has signed or not. Good luck to them. The agreement is explicit enough to show ambiguity.

Please do not conclude in what you want to believe it to be. If your command of law lexicon and innuendos is absent, don't even contemplate on making any conclusion.

In the absence of any legal knowledge, the power of your English Language is important. And in law, the use of the language is so important that you need to really understand beyond what a simple word can mean, and how this very word should be read in its entirety, within the context of the agreement.

In the context of the entire agreement, the Project can be called NEM and in the context of the entire agreement, it can mean to say that MS can take full rights of it, i.e., NEM to be given away free. You can argue about it, but the ambiguity is there. If there is ambiguity, there is room for exploitation, and exploit they will.

I only need to ask one question. If they are sincere, then let's make it very clear. If not, I do not believe the agreement is done in all sincerity.

The fact that we write pages about this shows its ambiguity. It is so easy to judge from what has transpired in the last couple of days.



I guarantee it.

This is just basic economics and greed. It's just the way it is. I think when dealing with large, established companies agreements like this you've got to read extremely carefully - regardless of that companies reputation, good or bad.

I am thankful though that some prominent members of the NEM team recognize this.
contraband
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 528


Community Manager: ETN


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 01:23:35 PM
 #22777

Oh man.

The benefits of decentralization rise again.

Seriously? Rockethead, too?  Roll Eyes
rockethead
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1059
Merit: 1016


View Profile WWW
March 30, 2016, 02:16:40 PM
Last edit: March 30, 2016, 04:46:16 PM by rockethead
 #22778

Roll Eyes

What happens if a random person not actively involved with NEM submits templates? Does MS own NEM then? That could happen any day, because anyone can submit templates.

Technically, if you look at the agreement, he has breached it. He is in trouble.

I did, nowhere does it say that.
You have to have the rights to the code you submit (which are the templates).
The "Employer" passages are for the cases where you are an employee for a company and your employer owns the code you write, so you need persmission. Someone who doesn't work for NEM and codes his own templates didn't violate the agreement.

You have made one assumption, that is, the agreement is only about the templates. The contention here is the ambiguity of the agreement which may or may not include all of the NEM code.

If it means all of NEM code and the person claimed to have submitted that in his/her submission as his, then he/she is in breach.

If you believe it does not mean all of NEM code and I am not sure about it, which I am not sure really, then there is already ambiguity. You can call me paranoid or anything, but the fact is, I work on certainty, i.e., let's make it 100% certain that we are talking about the templates, and the templates alone. Nothing else.

Then I am agreeable. Otherwise, I don't want to live to regret this very day just because someone says it does not include NEM code.

If you look at the agreement, it was generated in 2012. All I can say is, this is one contract agreement that has been sharpened and reiterated multiple times by people who are far more intelligent than all of us put together, and they are lawyers. Most of us here are just speculators and coders with limited life and business experiences.

bluedude
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500


y²=x3+ax+b, a=0,b=7


View Profile
March 30, 2016, 02:49:19 PM
 #22779

We wait jabo38
Do have answer from Microsoft first

Thank you for waiting. I'm still waiting for an answer to help us understand and add to the other information we are gathering.
Are we waiting to sign a waived agreement with MS, if they agree?
jabo38
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1232
Merit: 1001


mining is so 2012-2013


View Profile WWW
March 30, 2016, 03:30:03 PM
 #22780

We wait jabo38
Do have answer from Microsoft first

Thank you for waiting. I'm still waiting for an answer to help us understand and add to the other information we are gathering.
Are we waiting to sign a waived agreement with MS, if they agree?

Most people agree on proceeding in one form or the other.  We are gathering information from multiple sources to discuss the best way to proceed.

Pages: « 1 ... 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 [1139] 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 ... 1993 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!