XP

Those wallpapers are copyrighted by Microsoft. You won't find them on any legitimate site. Please turn off your caps lock. No one like to be yelled at.

sorry wasnt yelling... didnt know thati had caps on ..

Email me...!

At [email protected].

Email u.. Why ?? just asking

He probably wants to illegally distribute Copywritten Microsoft images...but I 'could' be wrong...

Well, I will send you the image in 2 halves. That way, I am not distributing the coprighted image, but when U stick the 2 bits back together, U will have the image!

Erm . . . no. That's like saying "If I put this game onto two CDs and then you put it onto your hard disk, I haven't broken the law". Copyright applies on any reasonably-identifiable portion.

Well, really, I don't see much wrong with very limited distributing of a system wallpaper by email. It's not like officially mass distributing it from a web site. It's not a warez copy of a software, it's just a wallpaper that comes with every copy of XP. Still, illegal, but not "evil" in my book.

I agree with paxx. It doesn't seem any worse than copying the winlogo, WMP UI, or XP UI and posting the skins here for download without MS permission, or is this not the same??

It doesn't seem any worse than copying the winlogo, WMP UI, or XP UI and posting the skins here for download without MS permission, or is this not the same??

-- No! This is not the same because it is only for 1 person, 1 time.

OK, since davad70 brought it up, if using the XP walls are wrong since it is copyrighted material, what about the XP logo throbber I downloaded from this site to use with WebBlinds?

I previously hadn't really given any thought about the walls being illegal to distribute, so now I'm wondering about the other MS graphic stuff, logos, etc.

So what's the distinction (if any) between distributing the walls vs. the logos and other MS (presumably copyrighted) graphics? Also, is it then kosher to include them in skins and walls which are also then made available to the public for distribution?

Just wondering since technically there seems to me to be no legal distinction between the use and distribution of the XP logo, for example, and the XP wallpapers.

sig101 -- I personally don't think it's a big deal either way. However, the difference is the walls in the library are derivative works, while the specific wall being discussed here in this thread is an exact copy.

I didn't think it that big of a deal either until people started insinuating that something heinous was going on.