Copy of Windows 98 Second Edition

[Normanny]

Hi, anyone can provide me a copy of the Windows 98 Second Edition. I need to
upgrade my old Windows 98 and be able to install a Netgear 108 mbps Wireless
PC Card. Appreciate any help!
--
normanny

 

[philo]

"Normanny" <normanny@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B4EEB412-A43E-499F-B3DA-F8F854F00F63@microsoft.com...
> Hi, anyone can provide me a copy of the Windows 98 Second Edition. I need
to
> upgrade my old Windows 98 and be able to install a Netgear 108 mbps
Wireless
> PC Card. Appreciate any help!


You can probably get a win98se disk on ebay


I assume the documentation that came with the card stated that Win98se or
above was required???

 

[98 Guy]

Normanny wrote:

> Hi, anyone can provide me a copy of the Windows 98 Second Edition.

Download and install a bit-torrent client. I've been using u-torrent
recently.

Then go to one of the bit-torrent directory sites and search for win-98
torrents.

Here's a few:

http://www.torrentreactor.net/search.php?words=windows+98&search=&cid=2&x=0&y=0

Let's try this one:

http://dl.torrentreactor.net/downlo...s+98+Second+Edition+Full+Bootable+CD+++CD+Key

Ok, after about 1 minute, there are 82 seeders. I'm connected to about
3-dozen of them, and I'm downloading it at the relatively slow rate of
30 to 35 k-bytes per second. The file is listed as 553 mb in size.
There are about 10 others that are also downloading it, and I'm feeding
some of them at about 5 kbps. At this rate, it's gonna take me 5 hours
20 minutes to download.

The torrent is a .UIF file, along with 2 text files (one of them is the
"serial", which I suspect is the product key). Ah yes, I've given that
a high-priority and I have that file now. It's a list of several dozen
product keys.

Not sure what to do with a .uif file. I'll search the net for that.

I'm also running peer-guardian, and it's blocked the ip 212.199.248.66
because it's identified that ip as belonging to "Golden Lines /
Anti-p2p". Perhaps that outfit monitors microsoft-related torrents -
but they won't see me.

 

[glee]

Still blatantly promoting software piracy, I see.
BTW, you bit-torrent abusers are the reason Comcast will be putting caps on monthly
downloads for all their clients, and soon Time-Warner will be restructuring their
Internet service into more expensive tiers based on monthly download capacity.

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BB4206.1C32D329@Guy.com...

--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
http://dts-l.net/
http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm

 

[Dan]

Thanks Glen. I agree with your feedback. Normanny, full legal copies of
Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition run about $50-$75 on Ebay which is a
great price for such an awesome operating system and do yourself a favor and
go legal because not only are you breaking the law with bit-torrent you are
risking even destroying your hardware if the appropriate baddie is placed
within bit-torrent. Gary S. Terhune, mvp mentioned how software baddies can
even affect hardware and I think this could be done by sending commands to
the hardware and overworking it but this is just a guess on my part.
Hopefully, you will go the legal option and grr. now Comcast is setting
limits because of the whole bit-torrent crap and yes I read that it will go
into affect October 1, 2008. Thanks for the garbage, all you who get
so-called free junk that costs everyone in time, money and expertise and
those who are trying to be legitimate in the industry without even having
illegal songs on their machines despite all the temptations out there and I
am very thankful to Apple's Itunes for the 99 cents legal songs that you can
get despite the fact that Apple Itunes requires Quicktime and you must so
frequently update it because of the illegal tying of the software and
Microsoft did this in 1998 and was investigated by the United States
Department of Justice so I ask why has the US-DOJ not investigated Apple now
for the same practices or hopefully maybe the EU will take the matter into
their hands when our US gov't is not willing to do the right thing and take
action. Just my 2/3 cents for what little it is worth.

"glee" wrote:

> Still blatantly promoting software piracy, I see.
> BTW, you bit-torrent abusers are the reason Comcast will be putting caps on monthly
> downloads for all their clients, and soon Time-Warner will be restructuring their
> Internet service into more expensive tiers based on monthly download capacity.
>
> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BB4206.1C32D329@Guy.com...
>
> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
> http://dts-l.net/
> http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm
>
>

 

[98 Guy]

glee wrote:

> Still blatantly promoting software piracy, I see.

Why is it piracy when the manufacturer no longer sells the item in
question?

And don't give me "well you can buy it on e-bay" crap. There is no
garantee that anyone selling win-98 on e-bay is selling a version that
*can* be re-sold or used according to it's EULA, or that the person
selling it isin't still using the same product key that they're
purporting to sell.

If it's a book, a music or movie cd that is still available for retail
sale, then yup, there is such a thing a piracy.

If it's any of the above that is no longer in print or being stamped or
sold, then making copies of it and passing it around is not piracy.

 

[98 Guy]

> Normanny wrote:
>
> > Hi, anyone can provide me a copy of the Windows 98 Second Edition.
>
> Download and install a bit-torrent client. I've been using u-torrent
> recently.
>
> Then go to one of the bit-torrent directory sites and search for win-98
> torrents.

> Let's try this one:
>
>http://dl.torrentreactor.net/downlo...s+98+Second+Edition+Full+Bootable+CD+++CD+Key

Ok, download complete.

I downloaded a UIF converter from here:

http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4009438/A_UIF_to_ISO_Converter.4009438.TPB.torrent

It's a very small (32 kb) command-line executable (uif2iso.exe). I sent
it to virustotal to be scanned, and it came back 100% negative.

I ran it and created a 655 mb iso file. I burned the file to a cd using
ECDC and I'm looking at it now.

By all appearances it's a win-98se cd. File dates are 4/23/99, 10:22
pm.

I'm not sure if it's a retail cd, or an oem cd, or some other version.
If there's a file on the cd (txt, dll, etc) that would identify the
exact MS part or product number, then let me know.

I performed a DOS-level comp command on the root directory and the
\win98 directory on the CD against an image of a win-98se CD I have on
my system and all files compared exactly (that's roughly 1/3 of the
contents of the CD).

So Normanny, go and do what I just did. You'll have a win-98se cd in
your hands (and a few dozen product keys) in about 5 or 6 hours.

 

[NedChristian@aol.com]

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 09:37:49 -0400, 98 Guy <98@Guy.com> wrote:

>glee wrote:
>
>> Still blatantly promoting software piracy, I see.
>
>Why is it piracy when the manufacturer no longer sells the item in
>question?
>
>And don't give me "well you can buy it on e-bay" crap. There is no
>garantee that anyone selling win-98 on e-bay is selling a version that
>*can* be re-sold or used according to it's EULA, or that the person
>selling it isin't still using the same product key that they're
>purporting to sell.
>
>If it's a book, a music or movie cd that is still available for retail
>sale, then yup, there is such a thing a piracy.
>
>If it's any of the above that is no longer in print or being stamped or
>sold, then making copies of it and passing it around is not piracy.

People who copy ANY softeware are sinners in the eyes of God and they
WILL go straight to HELL when they die. This needs no further
explanation.

Jesus Loves You

Ned

 

[98 Guy]

NedChristian@aol.com wrote:

"X-No-Archive: yes"

Why Ned?

Why don't you want your posts to be archived?

God says that people who set X-no-archive are sinners and will go
straight to hell when they die.

> People who copy ANY softeware are sinners in the eyes of God and they
> WILL go straight to HELL when they die. This needs no further
> explanation.

This appears to be your first post to usenet Ned, at least using the
handle NedChristian at aol.com. But perhaps your X-no-archive is
preventing google from finding your post, even before google expires it
on Sept 6.

So I can't tell from past postings (to this or any other newsgroup) if
you're being sarcastic or not, or just a troll.

Tell us more about yourself Ned.

> Jesus Loves You

May Jesus protect me from those that believe in him.

 

[Don Phillipson]

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BBF02D.38208D9@Guy.com...

> If it's a book, a music or movie cd that is still available for retail
> sale, then yup, there is such a thing a piracy.
>
> If it's any of the above that is no longer in print or being stamped or
> sold, then making copies of it and passing it around is not piracy.

This is an error in law (for which there was little excuse since
some US publishers began to print on the verso of title pages a
legal summary forbidding "mechanical reproduction.") Copyright
is not affected by whether a work is currently in print or on sale
or not. We are free to copy non-mechanically as much as we
like, but not to sell copies, and we are not free to photocopy
copyrighted works unless the copyright owner agrees.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

 

[98 Guy]

Don Phillipson wrote:

> > If it's a book, a music or movie cd (or software) that is still
> > available for retail sale, then yup, there is such a thing a
> > piracy.
> >
> > If it's any of the above that is no longer in print or being
> > stamped or sold, then making copies of it and passing it around
> > is not piracy.

> This is an error in law

Does copyright law actually include the term "pirate" or "piracy" ?

Anyways, someone once said the law is an ass.

> some US publishers began to print on the verso of title pages a
> legal summary forbidding "mechanical reproduction.")

The intent being to prevent others from profiting from the sale of
copied works while the copyright owner is trying to do the same. It
probably wasn't the case, decades ago, that copies were produced soley
to be given away for free.

It's one thing to copy a work and then try to sell it. It's quite
another to copy a work no longer in print (or production) and where no
money changes hands.

> Copyright is not affected by whether a work is currently in
> print or on sale or not.

I don't disagree that Microsoft is the legal copyright holder of the
work in question, and that they can sell the copyright to a third party,
or they can resume production and sale of the work, or they can do as
they are now - to have abandoned the work.

I'm just saying that there is no logical or moral argument against the
replication or use of a copyrighted work between individuals when the
work has been commercially abandoned by the copyright holder or owner of
the work.

I'm also saying that only the owner or holder the copyrighted work has
the right to financial gain and charge money for the work even if they
have commercially abandonded the work.

I see it a lot like a patent.

I am free to replicate the ideas contained in a patent for my own
personal use, or perhaps for others so long as there is no direct
financial gain for me. Only the patent holder can experience financial
gain from the ideas contained in the patent (until the patent has
expired).

 

[MEB]

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BBF02D.38208D9@Guy.com...
| glee wrote:
|
| > Still blatantly promoting software piracy, I see.
|
| Why is it piracy when the manufacturer no longer sells the item in
| question?
|
| And don't give me "well you can buy it on e-bay" crap. There is no
| garantee that anyone selling win-98 on e-bay is selling a version that
| *can* be re-sold or used according to it's EULA, or that the person
| selling it isin't still using the same product key that they're
| purporting to sell.
|
| If it's a book, a music or movie cd that is still available for retail
| sale, then yup, there is such a thing a piracy.
|
| If it's any of the above that is no longer in print or being stamped or
| sold, then making copies of it and passing it around is not piracy.

We [you and I, and others] have had prior discussions regarding this
unlawful activity before in this group when you have attempted to foster
this idea before, I see you have once again consciously determined to
further this piracy/criminal activity in this group once again. This would
appear to indicate that:

1. You are suffering from some metal disorder under which the realities of
the world are beyond your comprehension due to some physical or other mental
limitation/disability.

2. That you are under the influence of some drug or drugs which severely
impairs your ability to comprehend worldly affairs, legal rights of others,
and legal ramifications.

3. That you intend to further and foster this criminal activity in hopes
that the more parties engaging in this activity, the harder it becomes to
prosecute the individuals so in engaged.

4. That you have NO respect for Law, illegalities of the activities,
personal property rights, copyright, and other as relate. Which would
indicate that you also have ZERO respect for anyone on this planet except
for yourself.

5. That ALL of the above applies, and that you also have ZERO concern for
the fact that it is because of this, that others of the people are subjected
to increasingly restrictive Laws, Rules, Codes, and other which in essence
tends to remove their rights, invades their privacy, removes their
protections, and causes other legal ramifications and further restrictions
placed against them.

You, personally, were previously directed to review the Laws, legal
agreements, EULAs, and other applicable statutes, Treaties, and other which
define this activity you suggest as criminal, throughout the world..

Other discussions have been held in the numerous legal groups [to which you
were also directed] and other which might contain these types of
suggestions. Regardless, the activities you suggest ARE illegal and criminal
in nature. Nothing will change the stature of your suggestion to legal or
remotely acceptable behavior.

misc.legal.moderated

Legalities regarding DJ Performances
Copyright Infringement or Scam?
Legal to Import Books from India to Canada?
Legalities regarding Digital Rights Management and "Fair Use"
Does an internet browser infringe on copyright when displaying images?
Theoretical question - reselling ketchup?
Violating copyrights unknowlingly?
Does the programmer owns part of code copyrights when employed by company X?
School Integridy v. outside freedom of speech?
free open source modules from CPAN in non-free program
Sharing a Burnt Audio CD
Problems with getting Black's Law Dictionary 1st and 2nd Editions into
Public Domain
Slander?
a question of copyright laws [related to replaying DVDs on PalTalk]
a question regarding copyright laws
Bankruptcy and Software Licenses
Copyright Law regarding Museum Photos
Perjury in Federal Court- crime without punishment?
Copyright status of usenet posts
Plain and umambiguous language of statute
Can I Copyright Notecards / Business Cards?
hi, patent help here
Patent Worth Anything?
What is Legal Responsibility for Bank That Loses Business Checks?
Fair use of a characters name vs entirely different product?
Again: Copyright ownership and "work-for-hire"
Image copyrights and google groups
when is music copyright effective ? Can I post to myspace ?
treaty law
SpongeBob makes his legal debut
Right of Publicity laws and the Public Domain
Copyright Question
music and music video hosting

This group:

Unable to key product key off my Certificate of Authenticity.
Download a full version of WIndwos 98 SE for free
re-installing 98
AT&T rewrites rules: Your data isn't yours


Court:

MICROSOFT CORP. v. AT&T CORP. (No. 05-1056)
MEDIMMUNE, INC. v. GENENTECH, INC. (No. 05-608)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (05-1126)
SANCHEZ-LLAMAS v. OREGON (Nos. 04-10566 and 05-51)
DIXON v. UNITED STATES (No. 05-7053)
Ebay, Inc. v. MERCEXCHANGE, L. L. C. (No. 05-130)
Brigham City v Stuart (05-502)
SINOCHEM INT'L CO. v. MALAYSIA INT'L SHIPPINGCORP. (No. 06-102)
MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511 (9th Cir. 1993)
Gershwin Publishing Corp. v. Columbia Artists Management, Inc., 443 F.2d
1159, 1162 (2d Cir. 1921)

CODE/STATUTE:

"Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act" Pub. L. 105-304,
title II, Oct. 28, 1998, 112 Stat. 2877

The Electronic Communication's Privacy Act
This "Watergate" {Nixon years] inspired statute affects the public in almost
every daily activity. Largely modified over the years, but particularly due
to the "Patriot Act" after 09-11-01.
CHAPTER 119 -- WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS INTERCEPTION AND
INTERCEPTION OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

CFR Index

See also:
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ref/fedstat/copyright.htm
http://peoplescounsel.orgfree.com/ref/uscode/house_links.htm


And the numerous other sites, forums, government, and court materials [U.S.
and international]. So put your junk somewhere else... here it is more than
merely inappropriate, you give the deliberate false impression that it is
not illegal or.criminal in stark contrast to the acual Laws and other which
control the matters.

--
MEB
a Peoples' Counsel
--
_________

 

[~BD~]

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BC147E.68AF0B8B@Guy.com...

> May Jesus protect me from those that believe in Him.


He won't - of that you may be certain!

You are 'standing into danger' my friend.

BD

 

[98 Guy]

MEB wrote:

> I see you have once again consciously determined to further this
> piracy/criminal activity in this group once again. This would
> appear to indicate that: ...

Copyright and copyright law exist to protect creative works, arguably to
protect the financial opportunity afforded by those works and convey
that benefit to the authors or the rights-holders.

In the case of Microsoft (the rights-holder) and the work (Windows 98),
please explain what financial interest the rights holder has to the
work, given that the rights-holder hasn't offered the work for
commercial sale for several years and by all accounts will never offer
it ever again.

How is Microsoft harmed, financially or otherwise, today, by those that
obtain and use Windows-98 by any means?

What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit to
Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of Windows 98?

And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items to
others?

 

[98 Guy]

~BD~ wrote:

> > May Jesus protect me from those that believe in Him.
>
> He won't - of that you may be certain!

Oh don't worry. I'm quite certain of the limitations of a fictional
character.

> You are 'standing into danger' my friend.

That's an odd phrase - "standing into danger".

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

The entity named "thanatoid" is near death and has decided that this
absolves it of any responsibilities.

Of course, "thanatoid" is an incredibly ignorant SOB, too.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"glee" <glee29@spamindspring.com> wrote in message
news:uRVj2v%23CJHA.4800@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Still blatantly promoting software piracy, I see.
> BTW, you bit-torrent abusers are the reason Comcast will be putting caps
> on monthly downloads for all their clients, and soon Time-Warner will be
> restructuring their Internet service into more expensive tiers based on
> monthly download capacity.
>
> "98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BB4206.1C32D329@Guy.com...
>
> --
> Glen Ventura, MS MVP Windows, A+
> http://dts-l.net/
> http://dts-l.net/goodpost.htm
>

 

[Angel]

Hi ,

When I see a post like this, asking for a copy of a product that is
copyrighted, I wonder what goes through the mind of that individual and the
one the is trying to help him get a "free" copy. I believe that those
individuals have never heard of, or practiced integrity and/or morals. Maybe
they do not know right from wrong. Maybe they just don't care who they
cheat. One day, they will learn what goes down the devil's back comes up his
front. In other words, what goes around comes around. He may get a copy, but
he may get an infected copy.

Angel

"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BC04CC.968892EF@Guy.com...
: > Normanny wrote:
: >
: > > Hi, anyone can provide me a copy of the Windows 98 Second Edition.
: >
: > Download and install a bit-torrent client. I've been using u-torrent
: > recently.
: >
: > Then go to one of the bit-torrent directory sites and search for win-98
: > torrents.
:
: > Let's try this one:
: >
:
>http://dl.torrentreactor.net/download.php?id=1305362&name=Windows+98+Second
+Edition+Full+Bootable+CD+%2B+CD+Key
:
: Ok, download complete.
:
: I downloaded a UIF converter from here:
:
:
http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4009438/A_UIF_to_ISO_Converter.4009438.TPB.torrent
:
: It's a very small (32 kb) command-line executable (uif2iso.exe). I sent
: it to virustotal to be scanned, and it came back 100% negative.
:
: I ran it and created a 655 mb iso file. I burned the file to a cd using
: ECDC and I'm looking at it now.
:
: By all appearances it's a win-98se cd. File dates are 4/23/99, 10:22
: pm.
:
: I'm not sure if it's a retail cd, or an oem cd, or some other version.
: If there's a file on the cd (txt, dll, etc) that would identify the
: exact MS part or product number, then let me know.
:
: I performed a DOS-level comp command on the root directory and the
: \win98 directory on the CD against an image of a win-98se CD I have on
: my system and all files compared exactly (that's roughly 1/3 of the
: contents of the CD).
:
: So Normanny, go and do what I just did. You'll have a win-98se cd in
: your hands (and a few dozen product keys) in about 5 or 6 hours.

 

[98 Guy]

Angel wrote:

> When I see a post like this, asking for a copy of a product that
> is copyrighted, I wonder what goes through the mind of that
> individual and the one the is trying to help him get a "free" copy.

Maybe you should ask yourself why the manufacturer of the product no
longer sells the product.

Then ask youself what harm is coming to the manufacturer because of the
obtainment of the "free" product.

> I believe that those individuals have never heard of, or practiced
> integrity and/or morals.

What high horse did you fall off of?

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that Microsoft suffered no
harm, because it no longer sells Windows 98.

> Maybe they just don't care who they cheat.

Please explain how Microsoft was "cheated" in this event.

> He may get a copy, but he may get an infected copy.

After checking 1/3 of the contents, I'm satisfied that it was a clean
copy.

 

[MEB]

The same ol'crap again... gees I made a web containing your last ramblings
attempting to further criminal acts across the world..

READ THE COPYRIGHT LAWS and other applicable for once {I asked before, you
can read can't you?}. When you have something of value that backs your
claims rather than stupid questions, and ideas based upon thin air, bring it
back up. Until then, your just another mindless, ignorant party engaged in
criminal activities attempting to bring others into your criminal
conspiracy, unduly affecting everyone else on this planet by furthering and
participating in such activity..

BTW: you were supposed to read those cases, laws, and the rest, so you COULD
have a viable debate... they answer all your questions AND debunk your
presentations. Of course that ends all discussion, but I'm sure you will
never read OR understand, so what's the point... you will continue to engage
in criminal activities until some one catches you, then likely turn State's
evidence by turning in your friends and associates while attempting to get a
plea bargain...

--
MEB
a Peoples' counsel
--
_________



"98 Guy" <98@Guy.com> wrote in message news:48BC6FFD.2C9CC1D7@Guy.com...
| MEB wrote:
|
| > I see you have once again consciously determined to further this
| > piracy/criminal activity in this group once again. This would
| > appear to indicate that: ...
|
| Copyright and copyright law exist to protect creative works, arguably to
| protect the financial opportunity afforded by those works and convey
| that benefit to the authors or the rights-holders.
|
| In the case of Microsoft (the rights-holder) and the work (Windows 98),
| please explain what financial interest the rights holder has to the
| work, given that the rights-holder hasn't offered the work for
| commercial sale for several years and by all accounts will never offer
| it ever again.
|
| How is Microsoft harmed, financially or otherwise, today, by those that
| obtain and use Windows-98 by any means?
|
| What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit to
| Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of Windows 98?
|
| And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
| Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items to
| others?

 

[98 Guy]

MEB wrote:

> READ THE COPYRIGHT LAWS and other applicable for once

Why can't you get it through your thick skull that I am questioning the
basis or logic behind some aspects of the copyright laws.

I am not disputing that the laws, as written, does give microsoft the
right to take copyright violators to court, and that this probably
extends to file, CD, and product-key sharing and the use of their
products that results from this sharing, regardless that it's for a
product they no longer sell.

You (and others) obviously are incapable of having a philosophical
discussion about why the benefit of copyright laws should extend to
works that are no longer and will never again be produced by the
rights-holder.

I nonetheless invite you (or anyone else) to answer these previously
proposed questions:

| What exactly is copyright law protecting, or conveying what benefit
| to Microsoft, with regard to the casual circulation and use of
| Windows 98?

| And who is violating copyright law? Those that obtain and use a
| Windows-98 CD and/or product key, or those that provide those items
| to others?