Frogboy Frogboy

Only MY intellectual property counts..

▼

Only MY intellectual property counts..

A view from the glass house

from WinCustomize Forums

I've been observating (and participating) in some interesting..ahem..discussions with regards to Adam's article on using SkinStudio to import .msstyles files as WindowBlinds skins.

Some intersting "outrage" at the thought that some user, in the privacy of their own home, might run a skin that was originally in .msstyles format in WindowBlinds. That this was, somehow, a violation of the rights of the skinner.

Let's be clear: No one is suggesting that someone should be able to import in a .msstyles skin and then start being able to upload it around. You still need permission. The rights of the skin author should still be respected.

But we also have to have some perspective as well. .msstyles is MICROSOFT'S FORMAT.  It's a format that NO ONE has legally licensed to make use of. And it gets worse - every single .msstyles on the net is a derivative of the Luna.msstyles.  People either reshack luna.msstyles (or an existing derivative of it) to change the bitmaps and data in it or they use a $20 editor that is available that reshacks luna.msstyles with a prettier interface. 

The reason WinCustomize currently does not have a .msstyles section is because of that issue: Can we condone the distribution of what is borderline pirated files?  It's the same reason why we don't include Boot screens that are patched files of the NT kernal (we only support .bootskin and had to write a freeware program just so that we could have boot screens here).  You can't just patch someone else's copyrighted stuff and pass it around.  Believe me, I would love to have a .msstyles section here from a purely capitalistic point of view and if someone can rationalize it for me to have a section for them, go for it - I'm ready to believe.  But like I said, we're talking pretty gray market stuff.

But let's get back - so then the people who object to the idea that WindowBlinds would somehow profit from the ability to make use of .msstyles.  This is apparently somehow different than the commercial programs that have existed for the past 3 years that make use of .msstyles by patching uxtheme.dll.

And anyone who claims that hacking your system files to use .msstyles should explain to others why the main sites that promote patching uxtheme.dll do not have forums.  Even the main NON-FREE developer of a uxtheme patching program removed their forums. The most popular .msstyles distribution site has no forums.  Could it possibly be that it's because of the technical disasters it causes? I don't know. What I do know is how much tech support WE get from people who messed around with their files and blew away their default visual style or had problems when they applied a service pack or something else.  In my opinion, anyone trying to claim that patching your system files (either in RAM or on disk) is "safe" is not telling the whole story.

Puttin that aside - there are already programs making a profit from .msstyles and have been for years. Where's the outrage? But because the handful of original msstyles floating around the net might be able to be added to the 3000+ existing WindowBlinds skins Stardock is the greedy one? Please.

Regardless of the format, the rights of skin authors need to be respected. They are artists.  As the #6 most downloaded skin author on this site, I know something of the work that goes into skinning.  But I also know where my rights end.  When someone downloads my skin onto their own computer, my rights end.  What they do with it on their own computer is their business. People have been downloading and modifying skins for their own use since day 1.  And of all formats, .msstyles authors happen to be using a format that requires them to be using someone else's stuff without their permission in the first place. 

skinning
45,807 views 136 replies
Reply #126 from WinCustomize Forums Top

The .msstyles format of today won't work on Longhorn - unless something dramatically changes between the current Longhorn alphas and then. It's a whole different system.

That doesn't mean there won't be some other way to skin Longhorn "for free". But it does mean all those .msstyles that exist today are DOA - except for the fact that SkinStudio can convert them into other formats.

But no, there won't be some magical 1 byte patch that makes all those current .msstyles work on Longhorn any more than there's some magic way to get uxtheme to use eFX skins.

The ONLY way those msstyles are going to work on Longhorn is if they're converted which, based on how some people have reacted, is akin to devil worshiping or something.

I agree there are several nice skins for msstyles. But there are hundreds of really good skins for WindowBlinds not including the msstyles which work on WindowBlinds anyway.

Msstyles zealots are like the guy who is trying to argue that a program that can only read bitmaps is somehow better than one that can use many formats.

Of course, they're also essentially trying to argue that there are better artists using BMP than using some other graphics format. We're talking skin formats. And since WindowBlinds is a superset of msstyles as a format in terms of capabilities, it's absurd to argue that msstyles has "better" artists than something else.   What's next? Going to claim that wallpapers for Linux are better than wallpapers for the PC or some other sort of nonsensical comparison?

Reply #127 from WinCustomize Forums Top
I swear it's like beating your head against a brick wall. You don't get anything but a big headache and lots of aggrevation.
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #128 from WinCustomize Forums Top
#127 by Developer AthleticTrainer1981 - I swear it's like beating your head against a brick wall. You don't get anything but a big headache and lots of aggrevation.


I had written a quite lengthy and down-right nasty response to all the haters in this thread, but instead I just want to say how much I love you all and how much I agree with AthleticTrainer1981.
Reply #130 from JoeUser Forums Top
There's something I still wonder though. Do these people who have a problem with WindowBlinds users using their skins (since the full versions of SS and WB cost money) have a problem with StyleXP, since that also costs money and is advertised on the same site as their skins? If not, then it sounds just like an anti-Stardock thing.
Reply #132 from JoeUser Forums Top

I find it interesting that some people have somehow managed to take my words "I don't think msstyles are illegal" to somehow mean "I think msstyles are legal".

But what is also clear is that it's not a black or white thing.  MSSTyles, like those boot screens or logonui.exe's and shellstyle.dll's that are floating around are all, best case scenario, gray market things.  I'm not a lawyer so I don't know if they're illegal or not. I do think they're iffy enough that I wouldn't be inclined to make a section for that kind of thing.

But if I had to do it over again, I probably would put up an msstyles section on WC if I'd known MS didn't really care.  They've had 3 years to do something so I don't think it's something they fret over. And at the end of the day, that's the thing.

Some people didn't understand what the point of this article was. And that was, someone who's hacking their uxtheme.dll and distributed modified copyrighteable files (.msstyles) (legal or not) is in a glass house if they're going to complain about some other user converting their msstyle into some other format in the privacy of their own home.

Reply #133 from WinCustomize Forums Top

Some people didn't understand what the point of this article was. And that was, someone who's hacking their uxtheme.dll and distributed modified copyrighteable files (.msstyles) (legal or not) is in a glass house if they're going to complain about some other user converting their msstyle into some other format in the privacy of their own home.

Unfortunately some people are simpler than this statement....hence the blank looks and confusion....

Reply #134 from JoeUser Forums Top

As a lawyer, allow me to comment first on the EULA issue, one, if the company "sells" you the copy of the program, i.e. grants you the right to do whatever you want with it, except distribute it, then an EULA is essentially null.  Now, let's talk about the other kind of EULA, one whihc is just, if not more, common, this EULA grants you the use of the program, but not ownership, in other words, you are allowed to use the program, but changing or fiddling with the program in any way is forbidden.  Now obviously, such an EULA is difficult if not impossible to enforce, however, should the developers of the program catch you doing anything forbidden in the EULA, they can sue for breach of contract.

Having said that, Brad is essentially correct, you can do what ever you want with your own copy of a program, it's like taking a copy of one of my books, highlighting in it and taking notes, or even writing, "The Author is Stupid" in it in really big letters.  But if you took one of my books and made the cover green and then gave away copies, that would be copyright violation and theft.

Cheers

Reply #135 from JoeUser Forums Top

Oh, and I know some experts in Electronic Law, E-Law, who would be thrilled to tell you exactly why what's being done is both illegal and legal at the same time, but I doubt anyone really wants to pay them by the hour.

Cheers

Reply #136 from WinCustomize Forums Top
Just speaking as a user, I like that Stardock can import msstyles.

A) I will NOT spead money for a program to hack a file on my system.
B) I feel unconfortable with any program that hacks a file (on disk or in memory) to
make this work. (What else is it doing?)
C) I still like to make little changes in any style. (can not do that with msstyles
without buying another program)
D) I would just not use any msstyles if not for Stardock.

Bottom line as just a user msstyle would not even get a look if not for Stardock.

I do not work for Stardock, and yes I still think thay can do better!