|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Theo,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Everything you ever wanted to know:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
href="http://www.equis.com/metastock/professional/";>http://www.equis.com/metastock/professional/</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Steve Karnish<BR>Cedar Creek Trading<BR><A
href="http://www.cedarcreektrading.com";>http://www.cedarcreektrading.com</A></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:sky40912@xxxxxxxxx"; title=sky40912@xxxxxxxxx>Theo E.M.
Lockefeer</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, March 30, 2000 5:48
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Nasdaq-100</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>Thanks Steve
!</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>another `five star` :
CHKP. </EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>But NASDAQ looks either going
sideways or DOWN rather then UP at this moment or ?</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>Theo
Lockefeer.</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#008080 face=Arial><STRONG><EM>P.s. Could you please send
some info about the Metastock $1295 you are selling
?</EM></STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:kernish@xxxxxxxxxxxx"; title=kernish@xxxxxxxxxxxx>Steve
Karnish</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> ; <A
href="mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> March 30, 2000 2:46 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Nasdaq-100</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>List,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>It's been two weeks since I've seen a "cluster"
of quality Nasdaq-100 stocks scream to be bought. I'm recommending
four "five star" buys tomorrow: BVSN, ITWO, QLGC, & SDLI.
The only cautionary word is that: I've been short the June Nasdaq from
3/27/99 @ 4788 and I need another down day to trigger a buy signal for the
futures contract. Two weeks ago, the six "five star" buy signals were
supported by a Nasdaq futures buy signal. Nasdaq-100 signals are
generated by a momentum oscillator and the "star rating"</FONT><FONT
face=Arial size=2> is a measure of trend strength...determined by an series
of weighted linear regessions. All can be viewed, for your investment
in time, at my site.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Steve Karnish<BR>Cedar Creek Trading<BR><A
href="http://www.cedarcreektrading.com";>http://www.cedarcreektrading.com</A></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Wed Apr 05 17:39:23 2000
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA24712
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 17:39:34 -0700
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA28559
for metastock-outgoing; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:11:33 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA28548
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:11:22 -0600
Received: from smtp02.wxs.nl (smtp02.wxs.nl [195.121.6.60])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA27185
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:22:30 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from escom ([195.121.216.119]) by smtp02.wxs.nl
(Netscape Messaging Server 3.61) with SMTP id AAE407
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 02:06:02 +0200
Message-ID: <004001bf9f5c$533a4ac0$77d879c3@xxxxx>
From: "A.J. Maas" <anthmaas@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <004701bf9d1d$a945ce80$786fa8c0@xxxxx> <00ff01bf9dd2$dd05c8a0$d53b79c3@xxxxx> <003401bf9de2$48fd6900$c6e590d1@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Question....
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 01:35:44 +0200
Organization: Ms-IRB
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.3825.400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.3825.400
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and its Minister(MOJ).
They too now, can be qualified as the White Color mob (WC mafia, the sewer mob).
By the way, from interpreting the latest Judge's blunder-ruling, he (the Judge) has now
opened the way for anyone to unlimitly copy and distribute "anyone else's software",
cause since this ruling, no one can claim solely usage of the software, eg
the software's Copyright.
What I mean to say is, that from this misruling, all the software on the world belongs
to noone, ehh I must say in the end belongs to the Governments and their puppeted WC army.
Also meaning that since the Governments do not have to obey to the Copyright laws, than
its owners, eg the citicens, are free to do whatever they please to do with it.
Thus as from now on, anyone is allowed to give away any of his/hers software programs,
eg programs that were prior to this ruling TRUELY legaly owned, but are now, since the Gov's
Y2K confiscating ruling, anyone's properties.
Since Judge WC spoke out his verdict, COPYRIGHT means: your RIGHT to a COPY.
Thus users will benifit from this ruling in the end "anyway", since they do not have to buy
software anymore, eg like our reps the governments, you are at your "own" liberty to
decide what to do with, as long as you do not make it part of the Operating System.
Now that will notbe so hard to do, just give program its own unique folder, and it is
not "integrated".
This will also not at all be to my advantage tho, being a software company's shareholder, eg
since that now, form this ruling, it also speaks out that CopyRights do no longer exist as
a legal way to proove owner ship.
Example: Microsoft is no longer the owner of Windows, but the Governments are, eg since
that they decide in the final end what owner(Microsoft) can do with its property, and since
that we the citicens choose(own) our representatives in the Govs, also means that we
are the software rulers, and that we have our highly represented ruler, our own Judge W.C. Toilet,
ruling that "CopyRights" are of no legal value.
To express the further consequences of this ruling, all the software is now available and is
now for free, eg the Win2000s, AutoCads, Offices, Metastocks, Gets etc. all can be passed
along freely to other users. The CopyRight messages that come with the packages are now
only to be seen as a type of commercial only, eg a commercial banner.
Hence, that GovJudgePack ruling is actualy not sostupid after all, and in our own
-the software user's- favor too.
Thus, 3 hurray's for this Judge Whatever Closet.
Regards,
Ton Maas
ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dismiss the ".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying.
Homepage http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lionel Issen" <lissen@xxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: dinsdag 4 april 2000 4:59
Subject: Re: Question....
Ton:
You are correct. The law and the constitution means whatever a judge decides
they means. This was attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes, a chief judge of
the Supreme Court.
What is an MOJ?
Incidentally, over the years several companies have successfully sued
Microsoft for just this kind of abusive behavior. There was the Stacker
Electronics case which cost Microsoft $250 megs plus their legal costs. They
probably could have bought Stacker for about $15 to $20 megs.
Lionel Issen
lissen@xxxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: A.J. Maas <anthmaas@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 7:12 PM
Subject: Re: Question....
There is always still this minor Software courtcase going on, eg about a
software
being legaly yours.
Microsoft is always willing to explain how unjustified the US legal system
is in regards to Copyright, TradeMarks, All Rights Reserved etc. when
a MOJ, bunch of State reps or a Judge's ruling is later telling you
differently,
eg to forget about the ownership+rights that come with it :
"Nice that you are the owner, developer, creator and its originator
and that you also hold all of the above legal copy/traderights, but
that you legaly(since this over-ruling) also have no rights at all to
and do with "underlay" as you seem fit".
Excerpts derived from the forthcoming "Microsoft vs the X US monopolysts
States"
court ruling on their software(Internet Explorer) being rightiously(on users
requests)
and legaly(its their property, so they are free to do whatever they want to
do with it)
integrated into their own(=legit) OS(Win9x) software.
Go figure !!!!!!!
Regards,
Ton Maas
ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dismiss the ".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying.
Homepage http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Hefner" <vonhef@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: maandag 3 april 2000 5:35
Subject: Question....
Any legal minds here? I have been learning a trading method, and have since
developed an
"Expert Advisor" and MetaStock code to go along with it. My question deals
with sharing this
Code with others... for example here is a statement from there web page:
Any formulae presented are copyrighted. .... Copyright © 1996,
1997, 1998, 1999 Charles Drummond
"Drummond Geometry", "PL", "P&L", "Point and Line" copyright by Charles
Drummond. All rights reserved.
I did learn a method developed by Drummond, but all of my code is my own
work, so my question is:
What are my limitations in sharing my MetaStock work? I have no intentions
of selling this, nor actively
teaching others how to use it.... but I don't mind sharing the MetaStock
code (If it wont get me into trouble).
Thanks,
Adam Hefner
|