this was asked MONTHS ago
Wat, had voted “No” and changed to “Yes.”
microsoft doesnt even care for escargot, also, do they even know it?
No, please do not do this.
if he spams it, hes gonna get banned from the microsoft forum, whatever
Do you even think that MS will care, provided they ARE THE OWNER OF MSN?
They won’t care unless there’s a relatively small and fast commercial software that overtakes MS or has potential.
I think Microsoft doesn’t even know about, escargot. If a lot of people will go from Skype to Windows live, Microsoft knows about it and will destroy escargot since we use their software. I don’t know why but I think that implementing our server in their program we’re doing illegal. Maybe I said wrong but I said
NO. It’s completely legal. Escargot is done by reverse-engineering, which is legal. NO MS source. NO crack.
Escargot is completely open-source.
But providing downloads to pre-patched versions of the software is (to some extent) but not sure
It should be under terms of acceptable use. You don’t make a harmful thing. You are getting MSN re-usable since MS servers don’t exist.
This is a stupid question.
Escargot is done by reverse-engineering, which is legal.
This is actually rather grey-area. Clean-room RE is known to be “”“legal”"" but Escargot was built with tons of documentation of unknown sources and individual reverse engineering.
ReactOS also uses some unofficial documentation. No matter unofficial or not. (For example, Geoff Chapell) So, it should be legal if there’s no dirty source code or disassembling. Otherwise, a letter of C&D is near.
Also, proper individual reverse engineering should cause no problems.
(I’m also involved in ReactOS.)
Addendum: If there’s no official documentation, then you must create one and it’s completely legal! How could be both ReactOS and Wine built then? No or incorrect doc for various areas of Windows!
ReactOS and Wine depend on clean-room RE. As for “no dirty disassembling”, you seem to have missed what I said. Even I have a few IDA databases of some client stuff
You are right. I tried to say that source is not important, the way of analysis is important.