Shoutbox

I understand the point more than you know. And if you own a site/server on which leaked info is published, you are responsible too! It is even listed in the contract you sign when you use a hosting service that they can do whatever they want when you break the contract (by publishing or letting publish leaked private stuff). If you don't agree with it then don't use them as a hosting service. Although you will have a hard time finding a company who would allow such stuff. Absorbation is therefor also responsible for what other people write as a comment on his site (no matter if you have a disclaimer or not!). And his host can take his site down because of it. But that's another (though similar) discussion, which we had before.

---

The thing which is discussed here is the right of publishing private stuff (or rather not having the right) which is given to you as a tester (refering to the top article written by Inky).

quote:

---

Originally posted by vaccination
he has the freedom to do what he wants with it.

---

Sorry, but no. I'm very reluctant to say this but this is oh so typical internet-talk. In the real world he has not the right to do whatever he wants with it, even if he got that information from a 3rd party! The info still is and always will be the trade property of MS, and that gives them the right to take action. No matter if I, you or he likes it or not.

quote:

---

Originally posted by vaccination
MS shouldn't be punishing people who post content that's now effectively general knowledge, they should be punishing the person responsible for the leak.

---

There is nothing "general knowledge" about the info he posted and certainly not what has been posted by Inky! It is private knowledge. You're twisting things around. The reason you might think it is "general knowledge" is exactly because it got leaked. It became so called "general knowledge", it was never general knowledge to begin with.

And as for the info Inky posted: if he didn't posted that nobody would know about this new design at all anyways. I serioulsy fail to see what general knowledge that is...

quote:

---

Originally posted by vaccination
Quite frankly it's rude to go around threatening everyone with notices because they can. I'm sure many more people would be willing to take down the content if they were asked nicely.

---

Rude? Threatening? If you think so..., but I think we all can be glad it just stays with a simple notice. Because they do have the right to take it way further than that. And then what....

----------

Again, I like to take the comparisson with Plus! betas and the info Patchou posts to his testers. Nobody of the current testers is going to publish any information given be him in his emails without his approval. The same probably goes for MDL, SP, etc... And everybody understand this. Why is it that hard to understand this is the exact same thing for stuff posted by MS to its testers?