Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised

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).

---

But as I'm not the tester under the obligations to not post it. I'm not the person who leaked the information, I'm just telling people I know, something that I know.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised

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.

---

I fail to see how it's 'typical internet-talk', in the 'real world' I wouldn't be arrested for telling my friend on the street "hey I was reading this article the other day, aparently WLM9 is going to have these features.."

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised

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...

---

I agree, it wouldn't be general knowledge if Inky hadn't posted it, but again that's Inky's fault, he broke his obligations as a tester, has nothing to do with me. I've just read the article and now know the facts.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised

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?

---

Again, this has nothing to do with people who aren't testers telling other people what they've found out. As I said before, this is because Plus! etc choose reliable and responsible testers. MS should be more careful if they don't want this stuff leaked.

I'm not saying it's right to leak information(which it certainly isn't), but it's not the fault of the public who aren't under any contracts etc, if information gets leaked and they then talk about it.