EaglesoftDG citation

[cobzz]

should i delete this thread?
i arnt shore if it breaks the rules ?

[Fly2e]

Cobzz, you can't delete the thread, only Mods can delete an entire thread. You can only delete YOUR posts!

Don't worry about it Cobzz, I guess you got lucky. There is not a way you would have known anyway.

As stated, we don't support key swapping or piracy but in this case, it seems you were able to download the CitationX as there was a glitch in their recent upload.
I don't know if you can pay for it as it would be the right thing to do, but if you can't that is up to you.

Happy flying

Dave

[SaVas]

Personally, I would offer to pay for it by contacting ESDG, and perhaps they might be kind and offer to let you have it, but if not, still the *right* thing to do is to pay for it, but then again thats just me. hell, I am one of those that if I go grocery shopping and forget to take the items off the bottom part of the cart, and the checkout person neglects to charge me for them, I turn around and go pay for them.

Think about it this way. Companies make errors all the time. They are not infallable, however, this IS their livelyhood, and paying for something that one accidentally gets, helps keep them in business, and helps keep costs down.

Besides, the Citation X is the best payware biz jet out there, and its worth every penny they ask.

And yes I know the cost of some payware has steadily gone up, but you have to consider, that there are several companies that are "raising the bar" in what is offered, and as my father always used to tell me "you get what you pay for...you can buy a piece of furniture from Wal-mart for $100 that falls apart eventually, looks like s***, or you can go to a craftsman/woodworker and pay $1000 for something that can be handed down for generations as a work of art"

Use your own discretion and ponder this. if you dropped a $100 bill on the ground without noticing and someone behind you picked it up, would you hope they would return it or keep it?

As Dave said, its up to you. Consider yourself lucky, or offer to pay for it

---Stephen

[Scottler]

Several months ago, there was a glitch in the United Airlines computer system that resulted in airline passengers buying tickets for five dollars.  Today there's a story of US Airways selling tickets for $1.86.

Should these passengers be required to pay the difference?  The airlines seem to think not, and all tickets were honored at their purchase price.

I don't think the public should be held responsible for the misgivings of a company any more than the company should be held liable for the behavior of it's client base.

[cobzz]

hey all,
thanks for your replys, because i started this thread i thought
i could delete it, thanks for correcting me.
thanks for your quick replys!
it might of went freeware?
I posted in their forums to say that i got it for free of their site.
But when i checked on it the next day it had been deleted.
Ill see if I have to pay again.

cya

[Scottler]

I wouldn't.  You've done the right thing by trying to find out once.  If they deleted the post, that's on them, not you.

[N400QW]

We plugged the hole as soon as it was discovered.

An error on our part does not justify theft. You see, if you take something without paying for it then you meet the definition of a thief.

Your own concience must provide your guidance but as one user pointed out...if you lost a $100.00 bill...would you hope for honesty from the finder or expect him to keep it?

The suggestion by Cobbz to run over and download the plane for free shows a bit of what his character is about.

His glee at our expense also speaks volumes

[Scottler]

If Cobzz found the $100 on the sidewalk, and attempted to hand the rightful owner the lost bill, but the rightful owner wouldn't talk to him, how again is Cobzz to blame?

Furthermore, a character assassination of someone who says they tried to do the right thing by a company speaks more about the company than it ever could about the individual.

If you read the post, Cobzz was ASKING if this product was payware or freeware.  The only time he explained how it happened was when people doubted his authenticity.

I find the behavior of Eaglesoft in this case to be disgusting, and yet another example of the greed that has led to my lack of support for payware developers.

Now, as for your allegation that Cobzz is a thief.  I'm afraid you may want to speak with your legal department.    There are very specific criteria which must be met in order for something to qualify as theft.

For example, the intent of the party must be felonious; he must intend to appropriate the property of another to his own use.  

There must be a taking from the possession, actual or implied, of the owner; hence if a man should find goods and appropriate them to his own use, he is not a thief on this account.  (So your analogy regarding Cobzz's finding of $100 would not legally qualify as larceny.)

Unless you can prove that Cobzz had felonius intent, I would definitely suggest that you refrain from referring to him as a thief, or you're opening yourself and your company up to a world of litigation that you probably wouldn't want over a $28 file.

[Scottler]

Dave, IMO the only person owed an apology is Cobzz.  Mr. Hamilton's attack on Cobzz character is completely unacceptable, especially for the head of a company.  He should be grateful that Cobzz attempted to contact them to alert them to this breach and asked about the hole rather than going to shady websites and advertising it to anyone who would listen.  

[C]

The suggestion by Cobbz to run over and download the plane for free shows a bit of what his character is about.

His glee at our expense also speaks volumes

According to his profile we are talking about a chap who's 12 yrs old, so give him a bit of slack. He's just a lucky chappy who benefitted from a mistake. It's not his fault at all that the wrapper didn't work/exist on his download and he highlighted the problem too.

[N400QW]

We became aware of our oversite by others as well as Cobbz.

Cobbz posted in our forum..we deleted the thread and I emailed him a thank you and told him to keep the CX with our compliments for his honesty.

Fixed the mistake, then became aware of this thread and was surprised to hear that he was suggesting that people go take advantage of our mistake and was using terms like LMAO::)

He is still a member in our forums though I have not had a response from him at all.

We stand by our statement..."if you take something from someone without paying for it you meet the definition of a thief". Try it down at your local Walmart and see if THEY have you arrested for THEFT.

As mentioned we told Cobbz to keep the CX with our compliments but had no inkling of this thread at that time.

We have no intention to pursue this matter further with Cobbz. Everyones own conciounce will have to guide them.

[C]

I suppose this is an example of the joys (and intricacies) of internet shopping!

(in case this post was in any way mis-interpreted, I was merely referring to the fallibility of electronics (and there particular use here), not the "joy" of finding yourself with something you were expecting to pay for)

[N400QW]

Be advised that we are unafraid to prosecute anyone that we need to prosecute and my response was to clarify the chain of events and show that we asked Cobbz to keep the CX with our compliments BEFORE we became aware of this thread.

In no way should post be construed as an attempt to placate your veiled threats.

We are and will remain opposed to theft just as you are at your own home and/or business.

Good Day

[Scottler]

We stand by our statement..."if you take something from someone without paying for it you meet the definition of a thief". Try it down at your local Walmart and see if THEY have you arrested for THEFT.

You can stand by it, sit on it, put it on a slice of bread and eat it...the fact remains that the legal definition mandates INTENT.

[N400QW]

You seem to miss the point....we asked Cobbz to KEEP the plane with our compliments for his honesty in this case BEFORE we were aware of his posting here.

Are you suggesting that a finder should advertise to others that they should go download something that they obtained because of an oversite? If so your legal logic is skewed.
It would seem that there is indeed INTENT in this case and that would satisfy the requirement for larceny but as we mentioned he was asked to keep the CX with our compliments.

Your simplistic view of this issue does not change the outcome one whit. Think it through BEFORE engaging mouth