You are correct, but we are argueing more then one point. A license
agreement is a a license agreement, the arguement was that the copyright
concerned only violating the software protection, that's not true....


"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article XUAye.30527$Fn4.17322@trnddc06, "HMFIC-1369"
wrote:
That's not correct! It has nothing to do with the evasion of copyright
protection. If you have licensed software, you are prohibited from giving
it
away even if you no longer need it. If I gave you my copy of XP when I
installed Linux, I broke the law.

Not true. You may be in violation of MickeySoft's license agreement, but
not
copyright law.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:33:27 +0000 (UTC), "SeeAll"
wrote:

Hi,

I've been using the internet for 15+ years and over those years the web has
been taken over by selfish individuals.

As you clearly demonstrate, expecting someone to violate the law to do
something for you. What a twit.

The spirit of the internet is to
freely share information. When you have finished with an item you post it
for others to share.

OK, so you are also a communist twit.

I suppose it is to be expected that has more and more
people use the medium commercialism moves in. I will try other boards of
which thankfully there are many.

Fortunately, the thieves like you who tried to push that vision of the
Internet have been bludgeoned into submission so that the entire thing
has survived this far. Only an idiotic, communistic, twit would think
that the Internet can possibly survive without commercialism.

Enjoy your quest for someone who desires to see the economy collapse
as the amoral majority grasp greedily for what they have no right to.

--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 19:24:37 GMT, "HMFIC-1369"
wrote:

I have an excellent grasp, you didn't read it correctly.

I don't dismiss it you made that assumption.

If they want copyright privileges,then they should be held responsible for
providing owners with specific
product upgrades and support for the life of the product...

So the author of a book should keep re-writing it and sending you new
copies each year? The product may be complete garbage, but it is still
under copyright. Copyright says nothing about quality or usability, or
even if you can sue to get your money back, it simply says that *you*
can't make copies to sell or give away.

If the product sucks why would you want to make copies to give away
anyway?

--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

HMFIC-1369 wrote:

Ownership is Ownership regardless of Product, Pretty much everything is
copyrighted software and everything else. I'd say that if you purchase a
schematic or plans they to will include an agreement thet further protects
them. Certainly allow me to build one, but not 10....either to sell or give
away! As for books themselves let say you purchased the book, and you mother
is blind it would most certainly be illegal for you to transpose it to
braille or audio even though no such media exsists for that book. Or even
say for it's own protection that this book is one of a kind and no longer in
print,

Man, you're stretching for something to gaff over here, arntcha...

You can say whatever you want, and you'll undoubtedly be able to find
some product somewhere that has any specific set of licensing agreement
conditions you wish--folks are invariably creative that way.

For a simple copyright which is all that I ever even mentioned, all of
these extraneous conditions are of no bearing whatsoever, there just
crap you're making up to hear yourself type, I guess.

For your own use I don't think it actually defeats the intent of the
copyright to make a single Braille or audio copy--certainly I would
expect virtually any publisher would grant permission on the condition
you did not resell the copy anyway if you were to feel compelled.
Certainly there is a nation-wide organization which does precisely the
audio transcription for the hearing impaired at libraries and other
locations--I know as I have read for them. I'm not sure of what the
organization did precisely, but I suspect they have a blanket
arrangement w/ various publishers.

I'll reiterate--I was speaking specifically oa a simple copyright in
the context of the OP wishing to get a product for which rightfully he
would have ahd to pay. The only extent of significance is that one of
the purposes of copyright is specifically to prevent such copying. And,
more specifically, my comment was addressed to the OP in that the
purpose of internet from its origin as ARPAnet was not to spread
copyright work around willy-nilly--it was, in fact, a specific condition
of use when I first had access at University to not re-transmit such
material.

In spite of all the rationalizations offered and regardless if someone was willing to give you a copy of the plans, it's thievery, pure and simple. Norm charges for his plans and you are clearly aware of that fact. Like downloading music without the paying the royalty, just because it's available on the 'net doesn't mean that it's free. I guess that if your personal checking account or SSAN were given to me simply because it was available somewhere on the 'net, you'd be okay with me charging goods and services to you? I think not.

When you close your eyes at night, you can't but know that there is corruption in your heart.

"SeeAll" wrote in message ...
Hi,
Could some kind person email a complete set of plans to build Norm's router station.





TIA

SeeAll

HMFIC-1369 wrote:

snip

If I gave you my copy of XP when I installed Linux, I broke the law.

Regarding ownership transfer my Windows XP EULA reads:

"Transfer to Third Party. The initial user of the
Product may make a one-time transfer of the Product to
another end user. The transfer has to include all
component parts, media, printed materials, this EULA, and
if applicable, the Certificate of Authenticity."


--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

(Remove -SPAM- to send email)

The OP probably isn't reading anymore, since he has gotten his plans. But
my question is: why need a set of plans? If you've seen the item, and know
its features, make it from scratch yourself. My router table is at least
similar to Norm's, but I built it to fit a 24" x 36" piece of 1.5" butcher
block I happened to have and which I used as a top. It has given me years
of good service, and "I did it myself (thanks, DIY). You don't always need
a prepared set of plans if you have an idea, a ruler, a pencil and some
paper. My Dad was a custom cabinet maker; the only "plan" he ever worked
from was a rough sketch and a good set of measurements.

Steve

"news.east.cox.net" wrote in message
news:PCDye.149000$sy6.1442@lakeread04...
In spite of all the rationalizations offered and regardless if someone was
willing to give you a copy of the plans, it's thievery, pure and simple.
Norm charges for his plans and you are clearly aware of that fact. Like
downloading music without the paying the royalty, just because it's
available on the 'net doesn't mean that it's free. I guess that if your
personal checking account or SSAN were given to me simply because it was
available somewhere on the 'net, you'd be okay with me charging goods and
services to you? I think not.

When you close your eyes at night, you can't but know that there is
corruption in your heart.

"SeeAll" wrote in message
...
Hi,
Could some kind person email a complete set of plans to build Norm's
router station.





TIA

SeeAll

SeeAll (in ) said:

| I've been using the internet for 15+ years and over those years the
| web has been taken over by selfish individuals. The spirit of the
| internet is to freely share information. When you have finished
| with an item you post it for others to share. I suppose it is to
| be expected that has more and more people use the medium
| commercialism moves in. I will try other boards of which thankfully
| there are many.

Hmmm. Not much sign of sharing in the other direction since 1981. Mind
the wrap.

http://groups-beta.google.com/groups....woodworking+a
uthor%3ASeeAll&qt_s=Search

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/solar.html

Brian Siano wrote:
SeeAll wrote:

Hi,
Could some kind person email a complete set of plans to build Norm's
router station.

Sorry, but that's copyrighted material.

No need to apologize. It is legal to buy and sell coyrighted material.
Bookstores do it all the time.


Can't you design your own router table?

Evidently not.

--

FF

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 18:20:20 -0400, "no(SPAM)vasys"
wrote:

HMFIC-1369 wrote:

snip

If I gave you my copy of XP when I installed Linux, I broke the law.

Regarding ownership transfer my Windows XP EULA reads:

"Transfer to Third Party. The initial user of the
Product may make a one-time transfer of the Product to
another end user. The transfer has to include all
component parts, media, printed materials, this EULA, and
if applicable, the Certificate of Authenticity."


The EULA for copies of Windows XP distributed with (at least some) new
computers prohibits transfer of the software.

Not that this has much to do with making and distributing copies of
NYW project plans, of course.


--
Chuck Taylor
http://home.hiwaay.net/~taylorc/contact/

What's wrong with top posting? After one has read the post a number of times
as I'm sure most of us have, it is a pain in the ass to have to scroll down
all the time to read a reply. I agree one should bottom post initially, but
after the post has been shown a number of times why continue to bottom
post??


"HMFIC-1369" wrote in message
news:iLBye.30998$Fn4.25957@trnddc06...
only anal retentive bottom feeders bottom post!

You talk ****, bcause if time was money you wouldn't be wasting it posting
your **** on rec.woodworking!

Find another kid to play in your sandbox!





"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 19:46:48 GMT, HMFIC-1369 wrote:
See who's talking about stealing anything............If you simply
argue
for
arguments sake...........then have at it!

Have you ever noticed that when you top-post it makes it really hard to
quote the context of what you're talking about?

I basically said that "Equal Protection" should be extended under the
Copyright law. Consumers Rights, should be as important as the
copyright. I
can see you never paid 10K+ for a computer or software application....
that
didn't perform as sold.

You have no idea of my technical experience and responsibilities. And
10K would be cheap for most of the software packages I deal with - that
wouldn't even pay yearly maintenance on most of them.

Just because you pay 6 figures for a software package, doesn't mean they
have to, or should, support you forever. And yet, you still don't have
the right to give their work away to someone else, because you bought
the right to use it, not to copy and distribute it.

Don't get me wrong, just as there are good honest
company's and good honest people. Both deserve protection under the
law!
But
currently the laws weight protects many dishonest company's over an
honest
persons.

So stop buying Microsoft, and 90% of your problems will go away.
Even though I feel strongly that they have set back the world of
computing by a decade or more, making people just accept security and
stability problems as "normal and expected", I _still_ won't steal from
them or help anyone else to do it.

My point was the abuse of situations that company's claims are
unsupported and the difficulty or making things to costly to resolve
happen
more and more frequently and in most cases it's buyer beware........

What does that have to do with some guy wandering in here asking for one
of us to steal from Norm for him?

and don't tell me you never bought something, where the product line
or
company was purchased, the Purchase Agreement thusly null and void,
and
they
still sell the same product now under a different name or even the
same,
simply voiding the original contracts for the only purpose of evading
support for the sake of profit.

That was a really long....sentence? And I'm not sure what it's supposed
to mean.

I purchased a software firewall 5 months
ago, it was sold, I now need to pay (the current company) for support
or
get
it fixed, even to upgrade. Nothing about that in the License Agreement
I
agreed too!

So don't give them any more money, and get a good firewall from someone
reputable. Or stop fooling yourself and get a hardware firewall.

I said nothing about stealing but you really got stuck on that! You
must
feel very guilty about something huh?

No, I'm ****ed off that I've found copies of programs that _I_ have
written being distributed by people who had no right to do so.
There's no difference, ethically, between stealing software from a
programmer, plans from Norm, or music from a musician. If you want to
use it, pay for it. If you don't like the terms and conditions of the
sale, don't buy it, and don't use it.

Correction. Theft still exists.

"SeeAll" wrote in message
...
Hi All,

Just to let the selfish members know some kind person, or hippy, has very
kindly emailed a copy of his plans. Sharing still does exist.

Thanks

SeeAll

Not stretching anything. You're the one guessing and making assumptions..
But your ther man huh?



"Duane Bozarth" wrote in message
...
HMFIC-1369 wrote:

Ownership is Ownership regardless of Product, Pretty much everything is
copyrighted software and everything else. I'd say that if you purchase a
schematic or plans they to will include an agreement thet further
protects
them. Certainly allow me to build one, but not 10....either to sell or
give
away! As for books themselves let say you purchased the book, and you
mother
is blind it would most certainly be illegal for you to transpose it to
braille or audio even though no such media exsists for that book. Or
even
say for it's own protection that this book is one of a kind and no
longer in
print,

Man, you're stretching for something to gaff over here, arntcha...

You can say whatever you want, and you'll undoubtedly be able to find
some product somewhere that has any specific set of licensing agreement
conditions you wish--folks are invariably creative that way.

For a simple copyright which is all that I ever even mentioned, all of
these extraneous conditions are of no bearing whatsoever, there just
crap you're making up to hear yourself type, I guess.

For your own use I don't think it actually defeats the intent of the
copyright to make a single Braille or audio copy--certainly I would
expect virtually any publisher would grant permission on the condition
you did not resell the copy anyway if you were to feel compelled.
Certainly there is a nation-wide organization which does precisely the
audio transcription for the hearing impaired at libraries and other
locations--I know as I have read for them. I'm not sure of what the
organization did precisely, but I suspect they have a blanket
arrangement w/ various publishers.

I'll reiterate--I was speaking specifically oa a simple copyright in
the context of the OP wishing to get a product for which rightfully he
would have ahd to pay. The only extent of significance is that one of
the purposes of copyright is specifically to prevent such copying. And,
more specifically, my comment was addressed to the OP in that the
purpose of internet from its origin as ARPAnet was not to spread
copyright work around willy-nilly--it was, in fact, a specific condition
of use when I first had access at University to not re-transmit such
material.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 03:28:08 GMT, "CW" wrote:

"SeeAll" wrote in message
...
Hi All,

Just to let the selfish members know some kind person, or hippy, has very
kindly emailed a copy of his plans. Sharing still does exist.

Thanks

SeeAll



Correction. Theft still exists.


Maybe not. Maybe the person who e-mailed the plans then deleted them
from his own computer and destroyed any hardcopies thereof. Maybe.



+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

The OP probably isn't reading anymore, since he has gotten his plans.
But my question is: why need a set of plans? If you've seen the item,
and know its features, make it from scratch yourself. My router table
is at least similar to Norm's, but I built it to fit a 24" x 36" piece
of 1.5" butcher block I happened to have and which I used as a top. It
has given me years of good service, and "I did it myself (thanks, DIY).
You don't always need a prepared set of plans if you have an idea, a
ruler, a pencil and some paper. My Dad was a custom cabinet maker; the
only "plan" he ever worked from was a rough sketch and a good set of
measurements.

Finally! A modicum of sense!

Design & build your own. Make mistakes. Fix the mistakes. Learn!

--
- Andy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Failu the best learning tool. Criticism: the second...

"Steve Peterson" wrote in message
my question is: why need a set of plans? If you've seen the item, and
know
its features, make it from scratch yourself.

I agree wholeheartedly. Isn't that why we all started woodworking, making
something for yourself? It's not like we're operating a production line (at
least not most of us) and mass producing things. Every project is unique in
some way. The enjoyment comes from building to fit our current need and
situation. I think that if someone is capable of properly building something
from one of Norm's plans, they they're entirely capable of building from
scratch. It's just a confidence thing.

I save occasional woodworking shows to DVD. Not for the exact plans, but for
a general idea of how to build something and just for having the idea. If
and when I get around to building any of those projects, I'll improve upon
it so that it benefits me.

"Upscale" wrote in message
...
"Steve Peterson" wrote in message
my question is: why need a set of plans? If you've seen the item, and
know
its features, make it from scratch yourself.

I think that if someone is capable of properly building something
from one of Norm's plans, they they're entirely capable of building from
scratch. It's just a confidence thing.

Both methods are right. Plans can be very educational for the person that
is learning what joinery is good for certain situations. Plans serve as a
guide and should be modified to suit the situation at hand

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 14:30:01 -0700, Tim Douglass wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:33:27 +0000 (UTC), "SeeAll"
wrote:

Hi,

I've been using the internet for 15+ years and over those years the web has
been taken over by selfish individuals.

As you clearly demonstrate, expecting someone to violate the law to do
something for you. What a twit.

Exactly. There were clueless twits on the internet 15 years ago too;
most of them either got a clue eventually, or went away. It's always
funny when a persistantly clueless one thinks that their long presence
somehow validates their opinion.

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:22:29 GMT, Dave wrote:
What's wrong with top posting? After one has read the post a number of times
as I'm sure most of us have, it is a pain in the ass to have to scroll down
all the time to read a reply.

Well then, snip un-needed context (as I have done, and you didn't). You
don't talk backwards, why write that way?

I agree one should bottom post initially, but
after the post has been shown a number of times why continue to bottom
post??

The post shouldn't _be_ seen multiple times. Put enough context in a
layer or two deep to communicate what you're answering, and answer it.
Move to the next point.

Hi group,

I've monitored all your utterings since my original request for plans. It
appears many of you spend too much time sitting in front of a monitor
pontificating, rather than constructing.

The reason I wanted the plans was to assist me with my own router table. To
see if Norm had any innovative features I could adapt, I fear not the table
is very simple in concept. In fact it has features which would cause many
problems with dust accumulation around the router, possibly a fire risk with
the very fine dust from MDF. One or two mentioned if I had seen the table,
I haven't I have only seen it mentioned on the newsgroups and photo's on
TNYW site.

BTW I have received 52 requests for copies of the plans. In view of the
strong feelings within the group and the possibility of injury to potential
builders I have decided not to forward them.

I look forward to comments

SeeAll

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 15:59:36 +0000 (UTC), SeeAll wrote:
Hi group,

I've monitored all your utterings since my original request for plans. It
appears many of you spend too much time sitting in front of a monitor
pontificating, rather than constructing.

Your opinions about how others prioritize time is noted and given
appropriate consideration.

The reason I wanted the plans was to

(snip self-justification of why stealing plans without paying Norm is
OK, because blah blah blah and that's somehow different than blah blah)

BTW I have received 52 requests for copies of the plans. In view of the
strong feelings within the group and the possibility of injury to potential
builders I have decided not to forward them.

Riiiiiight. I don't believe at least 3 of your points in the above 2
sentences.

Okay, okay, the whole issue of copyright is VERY CLEAR.

But look at this from a woodworking standpoint. I'm going to be
redesigning my router table. Of course, I'll be looking at commercial
products. I'll be studying photos and videos-- whatever I get for free
on PBS or DIY, that is. I'll examine the photos of the router table
Rockler sells, which seems pretty nice. And if I don't buy _that_...
well, I will design and build my own.

I mean, I watched Norm's show on the router table, and liked the design.
But I knew that I didn't need to buy the plans: I could watch his show
and then design my own, with no problem, and it'd probably be closer to
my own needs.

Now, if this guy wants plans handed to him, that's nice (if a bit
infantile). But if this guys a woodworker, then _why doesn't he try to
design one for himself_? I mean, I have no problem designing my
workshop, my projects, jigs, etc. I like doing it. So why does this guy
_need to buy plans_? Is he so bereft of ideas or creativity or simple
engineering skill? Is he so lacking in imagination that he can't shape a
tool to his own needs?

To me, this is like a wannabe journalist coming to a newsgroup and
saying, "I want to write an article about third-world poverty. Can
someone give me an article I can put my name on?"

When you get done building your new router table I'm thinking of stopping by
your house and loading it onto my truck. You won't mind, will you?

Lee

--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

There's a dash in anal-retentive, by the way.

It's called a hyphen. Two of them ( -- ) would be a dash. Sorry. Just
being anal. g

Lee


--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 15:15:37 -0400, Lee Gordon wrote:
There's a dash in anal-retentive, by the way.

It's called a hyphen. Two of them ( -- ) would be a dash. Sorry. Just
being anal. g

Ah, of course. I understand, and I thank you both for the correction,
and for taking my post exactly as seriously as I did.

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005 15:15:37 -0400, "Lee Gordon"
wrote:

There's a dash in anal-retentive, by the way.

It's called a hyphen. Two of them ( -- ) would be a dash. Sorry. Just
being anal. g

Is it an en-dash or em-dash?

--
"We need to make a sacrifice to the gods, find me a young virgin... oh, and bring something to kill"

Tim Douglass

http://www.DouglassClan.com

Tim Douglass wrote:
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:33:27 +0000 (UTC), "SeeAll"
wrote:

...

The spirit of the internet is to
freely share information.
When you have finished with an item you post it
for others to share.

Freely sharing INFORMATION is not the same as blatantly violating
copyright law.


OK, so you are also a communist twit.

A cheap thieving twit, they're not all communists.


I suppose it is to be expected that has more and more
people use the medium commercialism moves in. I will try other boards of
which thankfully there are many.

Commercialism has nothing to do with it, and this is not a board.
Fact is, use of the internet to vioolate intellectual property
lasws has become easier with the rise of ISPs who sell access to
the internet. Unlike the pre-commercial days, when every system
manager was held accountable for his users, today's ISPs are
only interested in avoiding liability, they don't give a damn
about the internet itself, or even their own reputation.


Fortunately, the thieves like you who tried to push that vision of the
Internet have been bludgeoned into submission so that the entire thing
has survived this far. Only an idiotic, communistic, twit would think
that the Internet can possibly survive without commercialism.

No doubt the internet would have survived and flourished without
commercialism. It did fine beofor commercialism. Without
commercialism
it would never be as large as it is today, the web might not have
come about, but the basic internet would cerainly have survived
becuause it is so useful.

--

FF

I did buy the plans for the reason the OP stated. Modified the height
because I don't like to bend over and outfitted it with locking
casters. After I got the carcase and the dust box finished I put a
Jointech fence on it "just to see how I liked it," and I liked using
the router station so much I never have gotten around to making the
drawers." :-)


In article , Edwin
Pawlowski wrote:

"Upscale" wrote in message
...
"Steve Peterson" wrote in message
my question is: why need a set of plans? If you've seen the item, and
know
its features, make it from scratch yourself.

I think that if someone is capable of properly building something
from one of Norm's plans, they they're entirely capable of building from
scratch. It's just a confidence thing.

Both methods are right. Plans can be very educational for the person that
is learning what joinery is good for certain situations. Plans serve as a
guide and should be modified to suit the situation at hand



--
Vince Heuring To email, remove the Vince.