PDA

View Full Version : Someone who tells it like it is...and the truth shall set you free.


Dave
July 5th 03, 08:23 PM
http://www.omegacorner.com/

Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of the
end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't smeared
by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)

(waiting for the fanbois)

Dave
July 5th 03, 10:57 PM
"John Russell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > http://www.omegacorner.com/
> >
> > Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of
the
> > end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't
smeared
> > by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
> >
> > (waiting for the fanbois)
> >
> >
> When will you guys get off projecting Nvidia as the big satan.

Did I mention myself anywhere in that paragraph? >;^{ ----> I didn't think
so! Next, please...

The pro's and
> con's of "open" software is a debate in it's own right.

Did you even read what Omega had to say? THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE! (oops, damn
caps lock key always sticks while I'm making a point. Sorry...you can go
back to sleep now...)

The idea that Nvidia
> have invented "closed" software and are the only company who persues their
> rights under the law is rediculous.

Whose idea is this? Yours, perhaps? The idea that they are alienating
themselves from a substantial fraction of the gaming community with their
unnecessary bullying, backpedalling, harassment, underhanded behavior, and
outright lying is ridiculous, and of possible concern to shareholders and
the Board of Directors. I dumped my shares awhile ago (at a substantial
profit no less). I still use Nvidia chipset mobos in AMD system builds. I
don't play favorites. I just tell it like it is. You didn't read the link
did you? If you did, it must have missed your brain on the way from your
optic nerve to your keyboard...

I suppose all you Radeon users run your
> software using Linux to avoid using software of that other "devil" called
> Microsoft.

"all you Radeon users" eh? Jumping to conclusions, are we? Maybe you want to
look before you leap? FYI I own many examples of either. I can give chapter
and verse of good and bad from both ATI and Nvidia. Like I said, I don't
play favorites...

B
July 5th 03, 11:26 PM
Sounds like you do not understand what NVIDIA is doing in these situations.
Basicially they do no want drivers posted in any way which might be linked
in name to them on any 3rd party website. That is because they do not want
to get sued by anyone over faulty drivers. People will sue anyone for almost
any reason and NVIDIA is taking this action for this reason. Oh, and by the
way the first manufacturer to "cheat" with drivers some years back was ATI
and not NVIDIA. I really wish both manufacturers would stick to drivers that
perform well in ALL situations, benchmarking or otherwise...

regards

B
"Dave" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> http://www.omegacorner.com/
>
> Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of the
> end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't smeared
> by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
>
> (waiting for the fanbois)
>
>

redTed
July 5th 03, 11:39 PM
"B" > wrote in message
...
> Sounds like you do not understand what NVIDIA is doing in these
situations.
> Basicially they do no want drivers posted in any way which might be linked
> in name to them on any 3rd party website. That is because they do not want
> to get sued by anyone over faulty drivers. People will sue anyone for
almost
> any reason and NVIDIA is taking this action for this reason. Oh, and by
the
> way the first manufacturer to "cheat" with drivers some years back was ATI
> and not NVIDIA. I really wish both manufacturers would stick to drivers
that
> perform well in ALL situations, benchmarking or otherwise...
>

I'd be interested in seeing how many hardware manufactures have been sued by
users who have"knowingly" installed 3rd party drivers for that hardware. I
can't see any way Nvidia can be held legally responsible. Also...damage to
PC's ??? I don't think so, Tim.

Dave
July 6th 03, 12:13 AM
"John Russell" > wrote in message
...

snip

> These guys don't just want to report faults, they actively engage in
fixing
> them.

And this is a bad thing? I guess we should all just live with the faults
then? Is that what you're suggesting? Amazing! As far as I can see, he's
done nothing illegal. He didn't touch the source code. The only thing the
legal department could have found issue with is the Nvidia banner.
*You*obviously*did*not*read*what*he*said*did*you?* And all his mods can be
easily duplicated in the privacy of your own home. He was just providing his
mods as a service to the community. His disclaimer is clearly worded on the
install screen. Anyone with half a brain would realize what that meant.

This may sound great to you but it's only considered acceptable
> behaviour in the "open" software community like Linux.

One more time: HE DIDN'T TOUCH THE $%^*@! SOURCE CODE! (damn, there goes
that pesky caps lock again! Again, sorry...) Why is this so difficult to
comprehend? I hope you aren't working for Nvidia's PR, because you're doing
one hell of a bad job...either you're trying to snow me or you're snowblind
yourself. Please read more carefully, then get back to me, ok?

The vast majority of
> companies do not condone this behaviour, so don't go making out Nvidia is
> being especially pig-headed about this.

If he had modified the source code, I suppose you would actually have a
valid argument. He did not, therefore neither do you...

> And I'm going to keep saying you becuase it's clear from how you presented
> the original link that YOU agree whole heartedly with the what is posted
> there!

Why wouldn't he tell the truth? Can you explain this one please? Sure I
agree. If he had modified the source code, this would be tantamount to
violation of IP statutes. But even Nvidia's legal eagles apparently saw what
has so far eluded you in your reasoning. I agree with Omega completely. It
is destructive to the spirit of the community. And it will absolutely have
lasting repercussions...never mind that ATI has better product this time
around. It just strikes me as being silly that instead of diverting
resources to effectively better their product line, Nvidia is favoring the
strongarm approach. This speaks VOLUMES about a company's ethics and
priorities. Well, if you still don't see it, no point in talking to a wall,
is there?

Dave
July 6th 03, 12:34 AM
"B" > wrote in message
...
> Sounds like you do not understand what NVIDIA is doing in these
situations.

Sure I do.

> Basicially they do no want drivers posted in any way which might be linked
> in name to them on any 3rd party website. That is because they do not want
> to get sued by anyone over faulty drivers.

Not possible...nobody gets sued over third-party packages. Especially when
the disclaimer is so clearly worded on the install screen. If you think
otherwise, then please feel free to elaborate...

People will sue anyone for almost
> any reason and NVIDIA is taking this action for this reason.

Bzzt...wrong, thank you for playing. Next contestant please! Sure someone
can file suit...the court can also throw it out before it gets to a hearing
on grounds of frivolity and/or lack of merit. Who does that cost? The person
who didn't read the disclaimer and paid for a retainer anyway. Next case...

Oh, and by the
> way the first manufacturer to "cheat" with drivers some years back was ATI
> and not NVIDIA.

That's debatable. ATI wasn't even a blip on the gaming radar when the TNT
came out. And until the R300, they weren't even really competitive...sure
they cheated. No question at all. I'm not saying otherwise. And likely still
do. But ATI is now doing themselves a tremendous service with their
commitment to quality and to the spirit of the community, and if they want
to stay on top, it will continue exactly in the direction it is going.
Nvidia's downfall is being propagated by a serial comedy of errors on their
part alone. If they want to get back on the throne they have a long way to
go...now they have to shovel themselves back out from under THEIR OWN pile
as well...ah well, so falleth Rome...

I really wish both manufacturers would stick to drivers that
> perform well in ALL situations, benchmarking or otherwise...

This is absolutely true, and I agree here completely. That said, I do not
like when rendering quality is at all buggered for the sake of some
arbitrary benchmark. Optimization of code paths is one thing, but reduction
of detail for the sake of placating performance anxieties is to me an
underhanded and unacceptable solution. YMMV.

> regards
>
> B
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > http://www.omegacorner.com/
> >
> > Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of
the
> > end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't
smeared
> > by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
> >
> > (waiting for the fanbois)

John Russell
July 6th 03, 01:25 AM
"Dave" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "John Russell" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> snip
>
> > These guys don't just want to report faults, they actively engage in
> fixing
> > them.
>
> And this is a bad thing? I guess we should all just live with the faults
> then? Is that what you're suggesting? Amazing! As far as I can see, he's
> done nothing illegal. He didn't touch the source code. The only thing the
> legal department could have found issue with is the Nvidia banner.
> *You*obviously*did*not*read*what*he*said*did*you?* And all his mods can
be
> easily duplicated in the privacy of your own home. He was just providing
his
> mods as a service to the community. His disclaimer is clearly worded on
the
> install screen. Anyone with half a brain would realize what that meant.
>
> This may sound great to you but it's only considered acceptable
> > behaviour in the "open" software community like Linux.
>
> One more time: HE DIDN'T TOUCH THE $%^*@! SOURCE CODE! (damn, there goes
> that pesky caps lock again! Again, sorry...) Why is this so difficult to
> comprehend? I hope you aren't working for Nvidia's PR, because you're
doing
> one hell of a bad job...either you're trying to snow me or you're
snowblind
> yourself. Please read more carefully, then get back to me, ok?
>
> The vast majority of
> > companies do not condone this behaviour, so don't go making out Nvidia
is
> > being especially pig-headed about this.
>
> If he had modified the source code, I suppose you would actually have a
> valid argument. He did not, therefore neither do you...
>
> > And I'm going to keep saying you becuase it's clear from how you
presented
> > the original link that YOU agree whole heartedly with the what is posted
> > there!
>
> Why wouldn't he tell the truth? Can you explain this one please? Sure I
> agree. If he had modified the source code, this would be tantamount to
> violation of IP statutes. But even Nvidia's legal eagles apparently saw
what
> has so far eluded you in your reasoning. I agree with Omega completely. It
> is destructive to the spirit of the community. And it will absolutely have
> lasting repercussions...never mind that ATI has better product this time
> around. It just strikes me as being silly that instead of diverting
> resources to effectively better their product line, Nvidia is favoring the
> strongarm approach. This speaks VOLUMES about a company's ethics and
> priorities. Well, if you still don't see it, no point in talking to a
wall,
> is there?
>
>
Your whole attitude is that if it benefits the end user than it's right. The
law does not see things this way.
Agreeing with what any site is doing is not a question of truth or lies,
it's about sharing the morality or ethos of the site. I happen to believe
everthing they say about what Nvidia has done to them to be true, and the
ethos of what they where trying to do. That dosn't make it legally right,
nor does it make Nvidia unique in trying to shut the activity down.

Dave
July 6th 03, 02:45 AM
"John Russell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
snip

> >
> >
> Your whole attitude is that if it benefits the end user than it's right.

You're placing overgeneralizations in my keyboard. No this is not "my whole
attitude". My position is that if Nvidia had ANY legal grounds to justify
this they would have most certainly asserted them. And, naturally, Omega
would be forced to comply with the letter of the law. Hence, after all that,
the removal of the "offending" banner. Now what, so they get nowhere with
Omega (because clearly he is in conformance with the letter of the law) so
they go bully Driverheaven into removing his drivers? Hmmm...I'm not sure
how you can get your above statement out of what I've already stated, but I
hope this serves to clarify things a little...

The
> law does not see things this way.

I would imagine that if there were really ANY legal grounds to this
whatsoever then they would have been used as leverage, wouldn't you think?

> Agreeing with what any site is doing is not a question of truth or lies,
> it's about sharing the morality or ethos of the site.

You don't perchance think that what Omega was doing constitutes some moral
violation do you?

I happen to believe
> everthing they say about what Nvidia has done to them to be true, and the
> ethos of what they where trying to do. That dosn't

....insert "necessarily"...

make it legally right,
> nor does it make Nvidia unique in trying to shut the activity down.

Well at least we agree on something! ;-) But still your position
intrinsically *seems to be* (not "is") that Omega was violating the law.
This naturally does not bode well for people who like to tweak their Nvidia
driver sets, maybe Unwinder will be forced to stop work on Rivatuner, etc.
etc. Think that's next? (Survey sez...) I think you are skirting the issue
of legality here. My position is that he has complied exactly with the
letter of the law, which is clearly manifest in his statement, and he went
the extra step farther to let the community know why, and that he ain't
gonna take it either. Good for him. Now Nvidia gets to deal with the
backlash of their faux pas...

Jez McAllister
July 6th 03, 02:52 AM
Wow what a debate..I have used the omega drivers on quiet a few occasions
and it CLEARLY states they are not supported by nvidia in any way @ all.
Secondly Dave i agree wholeheartdly with what you had to say. Have people
forgot that "mr omega" was doing the gamming community a favour ?? One he
isnt paid for and one that if we are honest would of took a hell of a lot
of his time. I do not belive he has done anything illegal @ all (and i had
allready read his statement on his site as i frequently go there and browse
the forums ect). My opinon is simple = He has done nothing wrong, he is
being treated wrongly/underhandly/****ty for want of a better word. While i
agree with {quote}it's only considered acceptable
behaviour in the "open" software community like Linux.{quote}. Yes you may
have a point there mr Russell but while acceptable behaviour is one thing
illegal behaviour is another and mr"omega" DID NOT BREAK THE LAW. I mean if
you really have read the whole link and understood it and were able to read
between the lines then surely nvidias blood thirsty law hounds would not of
only had an issue with mr "Omega" using there logo (they would of had a
issue with lots more and would of taken legal action if they belived they
were right and mr "omega "was breaking the law. (come on it would of been a
warning to others that "tinker" with drivers and would of had much press.
Thats all i have to say other than its us the consumers who loose out here
(again) and hopefully nvidia will to which will hopefully in turn make them
realize what fools they have been.

"Dave" > wrote in message
et...
>
> "B" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Sounds like you do not understand what NVIDIA is doing in these
> situations.
>
> Sure I do.
>
> > Basicially they do no want drivers posted in any way which might be
linked
> > in name to them on any 3rd party website. That is because they do not
want
> > to get sued by anyone over faulty drivers.
>
> Not possible...nobody gets sued over third-party packages. Especially when
> the disclaimer is so clearly worded on the install screen. If you think
> otherwise, then please feel free to elaborate...
>
> People will sue anyone for almost
> > any reason and NVIDIA is taking this action for this reason.
>
> Bzzt...wrong, thank you for playing. Next contestant please! Sure someone
> can file suit...the court can also throw it out before it gets to a
hearing
> on grounds of frivolity and/or lack of merit. Who does that cost? The
person
> who didn't read the disclaimer and paid for a retainer anyway. Next
case...
>
> Oh, and by the
> > way the first manufacturer to "cheat" with drivers some years back was
ATI
> > and not NVIDIA.
>
> That's debatable. ATI wasn't even a blip on the gaming radar when the TNT
> came out. And until the R300, they weren't even really competitive...sure
> they cheated. No question at all. I'm not saying otherwise. And likely
still
> do. But ATI is now doing themselves a tremendous service with their
> commitment to quality and to the spirit of the community, and if they want
> to stay on top, it will continue exactly in the direction it is going.
> Nvidia's downfall is being propagated by a serial comedy of errors on
their
> part alone. If they want to get back on the throne they have a long way to
> go...now they have to shovel themselves back out from under THEIR OWN pile
> as well...ah well, so falleth Rome...
>
> I really wish both manufacturers would stick to drivers that
> > perform well in ALL situations, benchmarking or otherwise...
>
> This is absolutely true, and I agree here completely. That said, I do not
> like when rendering quality is at all buggered for the sake of some
> arbitrary benchmark. Optimization of code paths is one thing, but
reduction
> of detail for the sake of placating performance anxieties is to me an
> underhanded and unacceptable solution. YMMV.
>
> > regards
> >
> > B
> > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > http://www.omegacorner.com/
> > >
> > > Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of
> the
> > > end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't
> smeared
> > > by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
> > >
> > > (waiting for the fanbois)
>
>

Thomas Jarboe
July 6th 03, 04:43 AM
The only thing I have against Nvidia is there really UNREASONABLE high
prices for their cards.
Thomas

"John Russell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > http://www.omegacorner.com/
> >
> > Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of
the
> > end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't
smeared
> > by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
> >
> > (waiting for the fanbois)
> >
> >
> When will you guys get off projecting Nvidia as the big satan. The pro's
and
> con's of "open" software is a debate in it's own right. The idea that
Nvidia
> have invented "closed" software and are the only company who persues their
> rights under the law is rediculous.I suppose all you Radeon users run
your
> software using Linux to avoid using software of that other "devil" called
> Microsoft.
>
>

John Russell
July 6th 03, 05:58 AM
"Dave" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "John Russell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > >
> snip
>
> > >
> > >
> > Your whole attitude is that if it benefits the end user than it's right.
>
> You're placing overgeneralizations in my keyboard. No this is not "my
whole
> attitude". My position is that if Nvidia had ANY legal grounds to justify
> this they would have most certainly asserted them. And, naturally, Omega
> would be forced to comply with the letter of the law. Hence, after all
that,
> the removal of the "offending" banner. Now what, so they get nowhere with
> Omega (because clearly he is in conformance with the letter of the law) so
> they go bully Driverheaven into removing his drivers? Hmmm...I'm not sure
> how you can get your above statement out of what I've already stated, but
I
> hope this serves to clarify things a little...
>
> The
> > law does not see things this way.
>
> I would imagine that if there were really ANY legal grounds to this
> whatsoever then they would have been used as leverage, wouldn't you think?
>
> > Agreeing with what any site is doing is not a question of truth or lies,
> > it's about sharing the morality or ethos of the site.
>
> You don't perchance think that what Omega was doing constitutes some moral
> violation do you?
>
> I happen to believe
> > everthing they say about what Nvidia has done to them to be true, and
the
> > ethos of what they where trying to do. That dosn't
>
> ...insert "necessarily"...
>
> make it legally right,
> > nor does it make Nvidia unique in trying to shut the activity down.
>
> Well at least we agree on something! ;-) But still your position
> intrinsically *seems to be* (not "is") that Omega was violating the law.
> This naturally does not bode well for people who like to tweak their
Nvidia
> driver sets, maybe Unwinder will be forced to stop work on Rivatuner, etc.
> etc. Think that's next? (Survey sez...) I think you are skirting the issue
> of legality here. My position is that he has complied exactly with the
> letter of the law, which is clearly manifest in his statement, and he went
> the extra step farther to let the community know why, and that he ain't
> gonna take it either. Good for him. Now Nvidia gets to deal with the
> backlash of their faux pas...
>
>
>

I suggest you go on a software enginnerring course. Software is not just
"source code" as you and they nievely think. Everything in the installation
package is classed as software, even the readme file. They where modifying
the registry install area of the installer files. That means they where
modifying "software" in breach the "software licence agreement". So please
don't go around posting all kinds of clever expetive type remarks when you
actually don't know what you are talking about.

John Russell
July 6th 03, 06:14 AM
"Thomas Jarboe" > wrote in message
...
> The only thing I have against Nvidia is there really UNREASONABLE high
> prices for their cards.
> Thomas
Please elaborate?
Are you saying Nvidia don't have any card in your price range?
Or , are you saying it's reasonable for other companies to have high priced
cards?

>
> "John Russell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]
> > > http://www.omegacorner.com/
> > >
> > > Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of
> the
> > > end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't
> smeared
> > > by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
> > >
> > > (waiting for the fanbois)
> > >
> > >
> > When will you guys get off projecting Nvidia as the big satan. The pro's
> and
> > con's of "open" software is a debate in it's own right. The idea that
> Nvidia
> > have invented "closed" software and are the only company who persues
their
> > rights under the law is rediculous.I suppose all you Radeon users run
> your
> > software using Linux to avoid using software of that other "devil"
called
> > Microsoft.
> >
> >
>
>

J.B.
July 6th 03, 01:18 PM
> There are too many rank amatuers posting in this thread who have no
> understading of "software enginnerring".

You are then? Do you have the knowledge of what the law really says about
it?
Mind you, i'm a ict professional form more than 10 years on this moment, i
do think
this is an insult.
I stated, you should READ the adjustments, a regestry adjustment IS NOT
hacking, as you stated,
at least not in the country i live in (the Netherlands that is), i know the
law here, your statements
are not correct.
Globalism is far away.

John Russell
July 6th 03, 03:38 PM
"J.B." > wrote in message
...
> > There are too many rank amatuers posting in this thread who have no
> > understading of "software enginnerring".
>
> You are then? Do you have the knowledge of what the law really says about
> it?
> Mind you, i'm a ict professional form more than 10 years on this moment, i
> do think
> this is an insult.
> I stated, you should READ the adjustments, a regestry adjustment IS NOT
> hacking, as you stated,
> at least not in the country i live in (the Netherlands that is), i know
the
> law here, your statements
> are not correct.
> Globalism is far away.
>
>

A registry hack implemented via modifying the install file is "software
modfication" and in breach of the "software license".
Some posters have so far said
1)These people have not been modifying software because they think software
is just source code or .exe/.dll patching. I pointed out that error.
2)Others have asked why Nvidia picked on these people when there are lots'
of tools which fine tune registry settings. I pointed out that it's the way
that they did it which left them open to attack by Nvidia. It may well be
that Nvidia are just exploiting a legal technicality to bring pressure.
These guy's could have circumvented the problem by just supplying the
special values by their own .reg files, but they choose not to becuase they
thought there's was the more elegant solution.
It was, but also illegal!

redTed
July 6th 03, 03:46 PM
> A registry hack implemented via modifying the install file is "software
> modfication" and in breach of the "software license".
> Some posters have so far said
> 1)These people have not been modifying software because they think
software
> is just source code or .exe/.dll patching. I pointed out that error.
> 2)Others have asked why Nvidia picked on these people when there are lots'
> of tools which fine tune registry settings. I pointed out that it's the
way
> that they did it which left them open to attack by Nvidia. It may well be
> that Nvidia are just exploiting a legal technicality to bring pressure.
> These guy's could have circumvented the problem by just supplying the
> special values by their own .reg files, but they choose not to becuase
they
> thought there's was the more elegant solution.
> It was, but also illegal!
>
Right..you had better start stating the law as it applies in this case as
you seem so damn ****-hot on legal matters. And I don't mean Nvidia's
version as stated on their download site. So please don't start cutting and
pasting that.
The law from the point of view of a consumer who has complained to Nvidia
about 3rd party software drivers "damaging" their PC's.
Thanks.

Minotaur
July 6th 03, 05:21 PM
"Dave" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> http://www.omegacorner.com/
>
> Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of the
> end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't smeared
> by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
>
> (waiting for the fanbois)
>
>

Is a sad day, looks like the Legal and Marketing Depts are in charge of
nVidia these days.
Pretty obvious by the amount of verbal diahorea from almost every
representative from nVidia these days.
Where are the geek engineers and programmers? locked away in the dungeon
with non-disclosure contracts?

nVidia needs an enema!

redTed
July 6th 03, 05:24 PM
> Next time you download software I suggest you actually the "Software
> License" which is that thing you normally ignore and just tick as read.
> These things usually have statements like "software" has to be used
> "without modification", and "must only be passed on in their original ".
> These guys have not produced 3rd party drivers at all. They have modified
> the nvidia drivers by changing the combination of modules used, and by
> changing the default registry settings in the install file. As such they
> would be in breach of both the above types of license statement.

Like I thought. Nvidia ,r anyone else for that matter, can spout all the
rules and limitations they like, but will they hold up in court ?
Not likely in this case.

Minotaur
July 6th 03, 05:35 PM
You avoided the issue, now reply with NVIDIA's license agreement and then
cross link each section, as to where the Law was actually broken.

John Russell
July 6th 03, 05:53 PM
"redTed" > wrote in message
...
>
> > Next time you download software I suggest you actually the "Software
> > License" which is that thing you normally ignore and just tick as read.
> > These things usually have statements like "software" has to be used
> > "without modification", and "must only be passed on in their original ".
> > These guys have not produced 3rd party drivers at all. They have
modified
> > the nvidia drivers by changing the combination of modules used, and by
> > changing the default registry settings in the install file. As such they
> > would be in breach of both the above types of license statement.
>
> Like I thought. Nvidia ,r anyone else for that matter, can spout all the
> rules and limitations they like, but will they hold up in court ?
> Not likely in this case.
>
>
I think they think they have a good case. It's a far clearer breech of a
typical software license than 3rd party tweakers. All those do is change the
registry data after you've installed the pucker driver. It would be an
important case if it went to court. It would decide if the "software
licence" we all tick as read (and rarely read) has any real meaning. It
might even decide who is liable when "modified" drivers are released onto
the WEB for any damages that might occur. Nvidia would argue that those
doing this are in breech of the"software license" and therefore cannot
abrogate themselves of responsibility by putting a "use at your own risk"
disclaimer on their site. The problem is claiments are more likely to target
Nvidia as they have money to cough up in damages, a couple of guys working
from their home have little money to cough up. They can only lose the family
home once.

John Russell
July 6th 03, 05:56 PM
"Minotaur" > wrote in message
u...
> You avoided the issue, now reply with NVIDIA's license agreement and then
> cross link each section, as to where the Law was actually broken.
>
>

Funny I recall RedTed asking that I DIDN'T cut and paste form Nvidia's
"software License aggrement" and I obliged!
Consistency is not a stong point amongst those who have it in for Nvidia!

redTed
July 6th 03, 06:14 PM
>
> Funny I recall RedTed asking that I DIDN'T cut and paste form Nvidia's
> "software License aggrement" and I obliged!
> Consistency is not a stong point amongst those who have it in for Nvidia!
>
I only thought it was obvious to anyone following the thread to go to
Nvida's site and read the detailed legal stuff.
http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=legal_info
And there is no way I'm anti-Nvidia. I'm using a Gainward 4600 Golden
Sample, and very happy with it. I am anti-corporate heavy weights swinging
their bats at the little guy, rather than getting their own act together and
releasing completive, reliable products. At the moment, it's not happening.

redTed
July 6th 03, 06:15 PM
"completive" ??
Supposed to be "competitive" ...No idea what happened there :)

John Russell
July 6th 03, 06:33 PM
"redTed" > wrote in message
...
> >
> > Funny I recall RedTed asking that I DIDN'T cut and paste form Nvidia's
> > "software License aggrement" and I obliged!
> > Consistency is not a stong point amongst those who have it in for
Nvidia!
> >
> I only thought it was obvious to anyone following the thread to go to
> Nvida's site and read the detailed legal stuff.
> http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?IO=legal_info
> And there is no way I'm anti-Nvidia. I'm using a Gainward 4600 Golden
> Sample, and very happy with it. I am anti-corporate heavy weights swinging
> their bats at the little guy, rather than getting their own act together
and
> releasing completive, reliable products. At the moment, it's not
happening.
>
Minotaur had a go at me for not doing the opposite of what you asked. It
just triggered a general feeling of inconsistency amonst the collective body
criticism against nvidia.

Jez McAllister
July 7th 03, 03:14 AM
{quote} nVidia needs an enema!{quote} lol..thankyou for putting it how it is
and injecting a bit of humor into a "****ty" day for the consumer. Nvidia
bend over ill do it (enema)

"Minotaur" > wrote in message
u...
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > http://www.omegacorner.com/
> >
> > Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of
the
> > end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't
smeared
> > by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
> >
> > (waiting for the fanbois)
> >
> >
>
> Is a sad day, looks like the Legal and Marketing Depts are in charge of
> nVidia these days.
> Pretty obvious by the amount of verbal diahorea from almost every
> representative from nVidia these days.
> Where are the geek engineers and programmers? locked away in the dungeon
> with non-disclosure contracts?
>
> nVidia needs an enema!
>
>

John Russell
July 7th 03, 10:30 AM
"Minotaur" > wrote in message
u...
> From what I have read, you have just been speculating on what is in the
> license agreement.
> Was asking for what has never been posted....
>
>

That confirms one of my views, those who support these guys have never read
it either!

John Russell
July 7th 03, 10:55 AM
"Minotaur" > wrote in message
u...
> From what I have read, you have just been speculating on what is in the
> license agreement.
> Was asking for what has never been posted....
>
>

Speculation based on what I would expect, and hence what i'm accepting
without reading it. I doubt many can say that.

But since you asked:-

"This is a license, not a transfer of title, and is subject to the following
restrictions: you may not: (a) modify the Materials or use them for any
commercial purpose,"

Does this allow the modifying of the installer to introduce non-standard
registy values?
"No Separation of Components. The SOFTWARE is licensed as a single product.
Its component parts may not be separated for use on more than one computer,
nor otherwise used separately from the other parts."

Does this allow the mixing and matching of componenets from various builds?

John Russell
July 7th 03, 11:02 AM
"Minotaur" > wrote in message
u...
> From what I have read, you have just been speculating on what is in the
> license agreement.
> Was asking for what has never been posted....
>
>

I don't know why you asked for this. This issue is like downloading mp3's.
The vast majority know it's illegal but think coporate law is crap and they
just ignore it. If they thought about it most people in this thread knew
what they did would be against the software license without going into it
chapter and verse.

tq96
July 9th 03, 09:01 AM
> I think the main problem in this case for Nvidia isn't one of
> legallity but of responsibilty. As stated in the article on his site,
> Nvidia have had complaints from people that have installed his tweaked
> drivers and had resulting problems. I think Nvidia were quite happy
How did these people complain? NVidia goes to great lengths to make sure
that people never contact them about driver problems.

Blade
September 18th 03, 10:44 PM
On Sat, 05 Jul 2003 19:23:14 GMT, "Dave" > wrote:

>http://www.omegacorner.com/
>
>Intimidation over innovation? Good one, Nvidia. It's the beginning of the
>end. Time to wake up and see the writing on the wall (if it wasn't smeared
>by lowering the LOD settings in favor of better 3Dmark scores...)
>
>(waiting for the fanbois)
>