Chuck

"dont take it so personal Chuck." I'm not. Just don't want to get things out of proportion. Regarding the copyright issue, I'll try to get an answer from someone who is studying law.

If it gets too interesting like usual with buzzen topics then I'm afraid it will get closed. This is not to bash or promote anyone, I've done things in my life without permission and most of the time I've refrained from doing things without permission... I never stole any tangible object, but I've downloaded mp3s from Morpheus... in the end, it differs from situation to situation and person to person. If anyone considers me a bad person for this, then so be it, but it is the truth.

Off topic: I don't really know the details, but as far as I remember copyright expiration comes after 28 years (unless renewed) for intangible form of expression. I stand corrected. I agree with your interpretation for the rule of thumb. However, correct legal perspective is given in example in the article - courts normally differ. PS: That doesn't mean people should go on keep using the mp3's from file sharing programs like Morpheus or chat ocx from msn clones like Buzzen: In worst case scenario court can use last infringement date. Coming back to the original topic a lawyer once said to me that a copyrighted can get into public domain if statute of limitation passes. I can't find any clear ref. for or against it... I found one but it is not clear cut: If anyone has an online law article on this with clear details, then link it please. One more thing, don't ruin a perfectly good discussion with personal attacks. Purpose if this thread is to gain more knowledge surrounding copyright issues, I used msn chat control to make it more interesting, but that doesn't ok personal attacks to anyone. So please refrain from using personal comments.

Fair and sensible advice Koach made in his community. Won't hurt to follow it here or any other forum.

All the articles I've come across doesn't mention renewals with version changes at all. Each public version starts with its own copyright, so logically that would apply to copyright statute of limitations too. However, in the end it depends on the court(s). The details are very complex, following links would give better understanding: http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2005/05/s...s-part-one.html http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2005/05/s...s-part-two.html Speaking of context, I suppose Buzzen would be subject to Canadian Law. "not just the words you like." Is that directed to me? I'm just looking at the words l like?

Well, chat is still popular, but irc chat is more fragmented these days than the earlier days. But overall irc gets more than 4 million users per day. When msn chat was free it used to get more than 12 million users per day. But the thing with irc is that it hasn't moved on with the developments on the web. Forums and blogs are more used because they fit into web paradigm: security, browser app model, ease to check back messages even if you were not online, rich media content, etc... Developers at http://www.net-bits.net are trying to get things on irc moving into web paradigm. Let's see if they get the ball rolling. But I guess it is the best method for live communication and to meet more people so it is still popular. IM messaging is live too which is getting pushed by the big companies due to competition, but it more sort of fits private communication.

I said it is illegal as was the patched ocx, so whats the problem?

From the point of view of right and wrong, the comparison of patched ocx can't be ignored because both were/are illegal for the same reason. And how this comparison is misdirecting? What is wrong in pointing out that use of patched ocx was illegal too (imo worse) but people tolerated that and to used it for their connections. I would leave it.

Well, msn ocx issue is not exactly like flooders issue. 1. flooders disrupt users, while msn ocx provides an easy to use and friendly chat interface. 2. It's safer from user perspective to use msn ocx compared to ocx or exe developed by not so known developers (unless it's flash or ajax client). As pointed out in our room by a chatter that this issue is like use of patched ocx. It was illegal but but most people used patched ocx to connect their bots and scripts to msn chat network.

Well, regardless most people prefer buzzen. In the end, it is upto the people where they want to chat. Regarding msn chat, it is between msn and the networks who have made use msn chat control. MSN have no use of msn chat control so I don't know what they will do... whether they will allow these networks to use msn chat control, or make it commerical and ask them to pay or stop using their software. So there can be no possible connection when supporter of one chat network attacks another chat network that attracts more users. I bet she would not been talking about buzzen like this if buzzen wasn't attracting so much users.

Funny Well, Deanne is from VSIXc so maybe that has something to do with it. Anyway, I'm not saying it is right to use the ocx without msn's permission, but buzzen is moving on replacing msn's ocx with their own (which is like msn's ocx with few extra features) . Not to mention, you will be able use client of your choice in buzzen's new system if it is compatible with Net-Bits.Net IRC Server's client template system. Supported clients include: 1. Buzzen chat control (activex control) 2. Flash chat client 1.0 (adobe flash based chat). 3. IRCwx web chat 2.0 (ajax based chat. You can check the preview version here: http://www.net-bits.net/flashchat20beta/chat.htm ) 4. Net-Bits.Net chat control (activex control; preview in winter holidays this year). 5. ViperBot 4.0 (preview in winter holidays too this year). 6. cgi-irc client (perl based client; works with msntv2). 7. webtv/msntv2 built-in client support. 8. mirc 9. pirch Buzzen gets 5000+ users in peak hours and 3000+ normally in off-peak hours. This is a very high load and difficult to handle even for well established irc server software available on the net. However, buzzen's new servers will run like a breeze against heavy load like this. Buzzen's new chat website will have very cool new features that are mentioned on buzzen forum.

OCX vs car is a faulty analogy, because you see when you borrow a software it is recreated, on the other hand, if you borrow a car it is not. So if cars were like software then crabman won't miss his car if you happen to borrow it. Now I'm not saying it is ok to steal a software, but software and hardware don't have the same nature and it is a big debate in the legal community to treat the theft of these two exactly alike.

1. that tool is out dated. 2. it is missing msntv's chat module.

Anyone has PC and msntv/webtv? If msn messenger works on msntv then add me to IM if you wanna help in the development of chat client for msntv. pm me, I'll give you my msn messenger address.

Speaking of buzzen ad on msn... well, I don't know what actions msn contract allows (or prohibits) for msn chat staff but I've seen ads to other server (e.g. MSNTV/WebTV operators advertised their server that they have started for MSNTV/WebTV users). I've seen msn staff members advertise their trivia rooms (which I don't agree because it seems abuse of their position), anyhow, it may not illegal by msn chat staffs' contract. So perhaps MSN officially doesn't support the advertisement, but msn staff advertising links may not be illegal.

Exactly, I've seen so many sites closed down with msn logo (or even similar logo) and other images, but they never went after the sites that were only using their chat control. Perhaps they didn't had a problem with it. Think about it, clones in a way were reducing the load on msn servers... clones were/are an alternative for non-paying scripters, etc... but still people prefered msn servers.... I heard the majority of users were on group chats. I agree with Error, msn could have made a lot of money with ad revenue model.

Flash IRC server supports international languages (including Arabic, Chinese, and Japanese). Version 2 is beta, but we'll add UI in multiple international languages after the release of RTM version. You can try it out here: http://www.net-bits.net/flashchat20beta/chat.htm (note: at the moment it is beta and underdevelopment).

Public beta test link will be announced on http://www.net-bits.net/ before the end of this month.

1. Not everyone gona like when something comes out new. You will get some with jealous opinion, some with valid opinion, some with a different taste, some pre-judge things, and some are just annoying. Designer(s) normally have to go with gut feeling on what the majority would like. For example, when msn added profile icons not everybody liked them (some people thought they were gay), but now everyone is using them. 2. This theme is very good and so it is the default theme for this version. However, not everyone have the same taste and this client supports themes so people with different preferences would get the theme of their choice.

That is possible... if you think about it, right 4 or 5 days after its first public display msn announced its chat closure.

Almost done for public beta release, only few things left to work on... latest pic: Interface is designed by Yahoo

Not exactly. Not the same version of flash irc chat, at least. Reason does matter as a probability of potential risk.

"I've looked over buzzen site and still don't see where that is stated although it's been said that it has." Maybe they will explain more later on. There is still a month from msn chat closure. In any event, it is not like they don't have an alternative web chat to switch to. I can't give too much details, so I guess for the time being people have to take their word for it. i'm not even sure what we disagree on anymore lol Well, I don't like to be picky but parallel was terrible lol

I'm not justifying or making it right to breach MSN's ToS. All I'm saying is that risk is low.

The problem is parallel doesn't count value and nature of the two to msn. First, name 'msn' is not covered by copyright law, but it comes under trade mark law. Second, from marketing and finance pov, name 'msn' is more valuable to the company than a small activex control. Maybe all the legal fee can cost them more, you know lawyers charge more than programmers. In sum, chances of msn going after sites that use msn's chat control compared to sites that use 'msn' in their domain name is very low. Edit: If you mean msn can close buzzen, then yes that is a possibility. But parallel is confusing, because from corporate pov there is a huge difference in value for MSN between the two, not mention their is a risk of phishing with similar domain names. Whatever the site with similar domain says, msn or any other big company won't risk phishing.