[Steven W]

Well, I do apologize for my misinterpretation.

[RFMaster]

^rloew

There is some things that you refuse to realize or you simply prefer such situation.

When someone, no matter who, anyone writes some program

for example little C function:

Code: Select all

int blah(int a)
{
   return a+=6;
}

asm equivalent is

Code: Select all

mov eax, dword ptr [esp+04]
add eax, 00000006
ret

C Compiler will translate this little function into this machine code (or simply it will translate into this HEX "BYTES"):

Code: Select all

8B 44 24 04
83 C0 06
C3

So, can i say that this is my bytes?

No!

Why?

Cuz this or any other combination is common for many programs. And you know that!

[rloew]

I think it should be obvious that it isn't just the Bytes themselves but where they are placed and how they are arranged. Lamp222 and you didn't just copy the Bytes anywhere, but put them in specific places in a specific file.

I would claim "8B 44 24 04 83 C0 06 C3" as "my" Bytes if after months of work I found that putting them at a specific offset in a specific program solved a major problem, and you came along and wrote a program containing the above line and put it in exactly the same spot, in the same program, after seeing mine.

I used the term "Bytes" to distinguish the Code snippets that you Patched into VMM.VXD from the code of your Patcher.

If you were referring to my use of the word "Bytes" then you are just nitpicking.

[RFMaster]

What code snipets? You never released your code for patch or for patcher. So, you can't say someone watched your code.

Unless if you have a written acknowledgment of lamp222 that he looked at your code.

My little function "blah" can be placed at any offset, absolutely does not matter whether it solves some problem or not it can be found anywhere
in many different programs.

So can i claim that are "my bytes"? No!

I can simplify this, i can wrote

Code: Select all

  Man    Woman

Or this HEX bytes->

Code: Select all

20 20 20 4D 61 6E 20 20 20 20 57 6F 6D 61 6E

Code: Select all

Offset: 0000h 20 20 20
Offset: 0003h 4D 61 6E
Offset: 0006h 20 20 20 20
Offset: 000Ah 57 6F 6D 61 6E 

I can say these are specific bytes specially arranged at specific offsets. So can i claim that these bytes are "My bytes"? No!

Image editors, Text Editors, Sound editors etc. etc. They all produce some bytes, so can the manufacturers of such editors claim that bytes produced
by their editors are their bytes? No!

Or just look at compilers. Did Microsoft claim that Programs(specifically arranged bytes) produced by their tool Visual Studio are their programs(specifically arranged bytes)? No!

it is not nitpicking.

You're the only man on the planet who claim to possess some bytes.

So my point is: You can't claim that you possess bytes! You can't say "My bytes"!

That's all.

[rloew]

Definitely still nitpicking.

The "Bytes" constitute the Code and Data Snippets when placed in VMM.VXD.
Lamp222 did not have to reverse-engineer my Patcher itself. All he had to do is run it and reverse-engineer the results. The fact that the "Bytes" are exactly the same and placed at the same offsets is compelling evidence that he did this.

I already said "Bytes" is simply a guick way to identify my Intellectual Property, namely those Code snippets, at those offsets, in those files.

If I discovered that a screw placed in a specific spot solved a major problem in a car and then said "my screw", everyone would recognize that I am not claiming ownership of all screws. They would also recognize that I am not making any claims on screwdrivers.

If you are as old as you claim to be, you should know better.
Why don't you find an unsolved problem and come up with a solution.

[RFMaster]

Definitely still nitpicking.

Nop

If I discovered that a screw placed in a specific spot solved a major problem in a car...

So how can you stop others to do the same thing? You can patent this thing.

Why don't you find an unsolved problem and come up with a solution.

Maybe i will, one day. Maybe not. Who knows?

If you think that i have some intentions to hijack your work you're terribly wrong!

I never needed your patches! Never! And especially not now, cuz my main OS is Ubuntu Linux.

Why do i talking about this patches and patchers is because VMM.VXD is the property of Microsoft. And VMM32.VXD also.

And your patcher doing something to these files and we agree that you have copyright on your patcher and you can do with your patcher
whatever you want.

But you can't stop others to do even the same thing to these MS files. Only Microsoft can.

Patent your thing if you want to nobody else do these things.

[rloew]

I never said you intended to hijack my work at any point, so why do you seem to be claiming the right to do so.
I'm not sure if a Patent is an appropriate approach, and if what others have said, it may not be valid in Europe.
In addition the cost is too high for a market as small as that for Windows 9x.

Microsoft and maybe others can make modifications to these files possibly even for the same purpose, but they have to do so without knowledge of my solution. Copying my Patches, especially without even understanding what they do, is wrong.

As I said before, if people can legally copy my Patches without compensation to me, then I have absolutely no reason to make any of them available to others.

Is that what you want?
Prove your case and you will never see another Patch from me.
I will stick with Programs where there is no question of rights and no way to reverse-engineer any Demo, if offered.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

You are constantly saying lamp222 stole your patch because the bytes are in the same location as yours. You DoNOT have any concrete proof he did this. Right now, everyone is speculating with hearsay. If Microsoft purposely limted the ram, that means there we full aware of how to turn it on as well. Its their source code and damn sure they know it better than all of us. There is a saying, Great minds think a like. If someone decides to come up with a patch, that does exactly what yours does, you would assume because they put the bytes in the same location, that they ripped you off. Possession is nine tenths of the law and the burden of proof is on the accuser. My sister is a lawer, worked for the prosecution to learn their strategy and tactics. Now she prevents assholes like them from sending innocent people to jail.

[PROBLEMCHYLD]

Your patcher does not create offsets, it only patches the bytes at specific offsets, meaning the offsets already exist which is Microsoft code.

[rloew]

You are constantly saying lamp222 stole your patch because the bytes are in the same location as yours. You DoNOT have any concrete proof he did this. Right now, everyone is speculating with hearsay. If Microsoft purposely limted the ram, that means there we full aware of how to turn it on as well. Its their source code and damn sure they know it better than all of us. There is a saying, Great minds think a like. If someone decides to come up with a patch, that does exactly what yours does, you would assume because they put the bytes in the same location, that they ripped you off. Possession is nine tenths of the law and the burden of proof is on the accuser. My sister is a lawer, worked for the prosecution to learn their strategy and tactics. Now she prevents assholes like them from sending innocent people to jail.

As I said previously, there are some arbitrary choices in the way I implemented my Patches. It is very unlikely that someone else would pick the same values as I did. I also said that there is extra data, not required for the Patch to function, also present. Who would duplicate that?

Microsoft did not explicitly limit the RAM, there is piece of code that only works above 2GiB. If they did, they would have probably sold an unlock code. It looks more like someone decided that implementing more than 1GiB was not needed and did not provide the resources to the Kernel needed for more.

Your patcher does not create offsets, it only patches the bytes at specific offsets, meaning the offsets already exist which is Microsoft code.

That is a pretty stupid argument. All offsets from 0 to the EOF exist. Determing the offsets where the Patches are needed was a key part of my research.

Since you seem to have plenty of time to attack my work, you obviously have the time to send the payment for the work I did for you.