[CrackMonkey] bad and stupid people of 1998

[Jay Sulzberger]

On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Nick Moffitt wrote:

> Forwarded with permission.
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Martin Pool <mbp at users.sourceforge.net> -----
> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 01:09:23 -0700
> To: gnu at gnu.org, mbp at users.sourceforge.net, palmdev at reapertech.com
> Subject: GPL violation
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 09:55:31AM +0100, Palm Dev wrote:
> > At 12:12 28/08/2000 +1100, you wrote:
> > 
> > Dear Sir
> > 
> > In reference to your email, we would like to inform of the history
> > of our SafeKeys application.
> > 
> > This application was originally written for a client during 1998.
> > This application was delivered to the client during Decemeber 1998.
> > However this application was not paid for by the client after
> > delivery because the client ceased trading. When we originally
> > delivered we provided the client with all rights however because
> > they where unable to pay our invoice, as a result we recently
> > received the rights back and a decision was made to make it
> > available free on the Internet.  The license is our standard
> > freeware license.  We have no intention of charging for this tool
> > for commercial use either however we would like commercial users to
> > first contact us prior to use so we can confirm that they will not
> > violate any patents, etc. for the algorithms within the RSAEuro
> > library.
> > 
> > As this application was originally developed prior to your
> > application we belive this application is different to yours. 
> 
> This is plainly false.  The application is not different in any
> significant way.  Either you are lying, or you are being lied to by
> one of your employees.
> 
> If you did write an application in 1998, then it has since been
> completely replaced by code from GNU Keyring for PalmOS.
> 
> There are abundant points of similarity between SafeKeys and GNU
> Keyring for PalmOS.  I have consulted several expert software
> developers and a lawyer specializing in intellectual property law and
> they all agree that it seems beyond reasonable doubt that SafeKeys is
> a derivative work.
> 
> On all of these measures, SafeKeys is identical or almost identical to
> GNU Keyring:
> 
>  * User interface (pixel-for-pixel identical in most cases)
> 
>  * Strings (largely identical, including errors)
> 
>  * Bugs, including a showstopper data loss bug that makes this version
>    of the software completely unsuitable for commercial release.  (If
>    you were going to sell this software and you wrote it, presumably
>    you know what the bug is.  Do you?)

Ha, this has often been debunked!  It is an Urban Legend!  It is just a
variant of the old "false information in maps so copiers wil get caught"
COMPLETE LIE!  It has often ben exposed by the penetrating, superior, but
gentle in their impregnable superiority, wits and flaneurs of the froup
something-or-other-urbane-legendi!

> 
>  * Program functionality (exactly the same)

IMPOSSIBLE!  The OPEN SOURCE MARKETING only began in 1998, and the very
concept od one way quantum BRAGGADOCIO functions was not published in the
OPEN LIAERAOMA in November of 1998.  Why Stallman did not not even thing
of GNUPG until 19000.

> 
>  * Internal strings in the program, including filenames, assertion
>    messages, and errors

Did you know that PASCALI rediscoverd all of the MIXOLYDIANO MODES whne he
was SIX/  His sister said so under OATH lats year at the USPTO>  Later at
the new sconderence, she testified, under the TESTICLES!, that he fouind
them in ythe same order as theyf irst appaearded at
Mohenjo-Mojo-pay-meintiny amounts securelY!

> 
> I have documented some of the above on this web page, and will add
> more details if necessary.
> 
>   http://gnukeyring.sourceforge.net/safekeys/

EXPECT a COURT ORDEr signed by the JUDGE CHAPLIAN OF ALL MEDUA< and
wiritren ny the CONSP^WMPAA&DVDCCA&RIAA&Lars in on hour to be sergvedm,
with REVERSE DNS at OUR^WALL RIGHT THUNKED THOKLS CONWENINECianmtmento111!


> 
> I challenge you to examine these pages and repeat your statement that
> the programs are different.

Hunmmm...  jjjhhh !

SHOPW US THE MON^WSOURCE

> 
> I am extremely disappointed by your continued denial and evasion of
> obvious infringements.  I expect to receive a satisfactory written
> apology and retraction within a week.
> 
> --  
> Martin Pool                      mbp at users.sourceforge.net

I know your ancient polot, you smalltalker!  Just a huge DICT aren't that
your real O-Objective!

http://www.squaeck^Wsquick.org

oo--JS.