On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 19:28:41 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> On 04/01/2022 18:14, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 12:51:28 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 04/01/2022 11:47, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 00:02:52 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:27:56 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03/01/2022 21:23, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let me make this simple for your simple mind:
>>>>>>>> I spot a car that's left unlocked. I point it out to you. You
>>>>>>>> steal the car. Who's the theif?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are complicit where you are aiding and abetting the theft through
>>>>>>> Joint Enterprise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stop being such a pedantic fuckwit. There is no judge on this earth
>>>>>> who would do me for saying to you, "hey that car's not locked".
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we're now aware of the age (physical or mental) of "Commander".
>>>>
>>>> Let me try another example to educate you:
>>>>
>>>> I fit a burglar alarm to my house. A burglar avoids my house and breaks
>>>> into next door. According to your way of thinking, I'm an accomplice to
>>>> that theft.
>>>
>>> If you told the burglar the alarm was ineffective and gave
>>> encouragement, then yes, absolutely.
>>
>> You mean putting up a sign saying "warning this house is alarmed"?
>> Which is obviously going to make him try the next house.
>
> No that is not what I meant, re-read my post. Your skills in English
> comprehension need improving.

You're not quite with it, I'm talking about my house with a working alarm and the neighbour's house with no alarm. There was never a defective alarm mentioned.

Quite funny you say I have comprehension skills after proving you don't.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 19:56:50 -0000, Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:

> On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> (in article <op.1fhjhxcumvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
>
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:27:46 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
>> > (in article <op.1fhhfkjlmvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
>> >
>> > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:23:40 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
>> > > > (in article <op.1fhgyioamvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael
>> > > > > Ejercito<MEjercit@hotmail.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> > > > > > > On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not..available>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Kinsey,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own..
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
>> > > > > > Is there evidence of this?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > GIYF.
>> > > >
>> > > > That would seem to indicate that the answer is ’no’.
>> > >
>> > > No, it means I can't be bothered trawling through my internet history to
>> > > find
>> > > where I read it.
>> >
>> > Yeah. Right. I totally believe you.
>>
>> Are you incapable of a search yourself? I know it's there, you don't. You
>> can't know something does not exist until you look.
>
> Son, _you_ are saying it’s there. So you can’t produce it? That doesn’t
> mean that it’s not there. It does mean that it’s up to me to evaluate the
> likelihood of my finding it without wasting too much time. Particularly as
> your excuse for not producing it is that it would take you too much time and
> trouble. You know what it is that you’re looking for, and it’ll take you
> too much time to find it? Hmm.
>
> Suuuuure it exists. Suuuure you just don’t have it. Suuuure. I believe you.
>
> I also have a bridge for sale. Cheap.

If you hear on the news there's something happening and you don't believe it, do you research it yourself or phone them up?

On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
(in article <op.1fhl67efmvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):

> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 19:56:50 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>
> > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> > (in article <op.1fhjhxcumvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
> >
> > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:27:46 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> > > > (in article <op.1fhhfkjlmvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:23:40 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> > > > > > (in article <op.1fhgyioamvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael
> > > > > > > Ejercito<MEjercit@hotmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Commander Kinsey wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kinsey,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
> > > > > > > > Is there evidence of this?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > GIYF.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That would seem to indicate that the answer is ’no’.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, it means I can't be bothered trawling through my internet history to
> > > > > find
> > > > > where I read it.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah. Right. I totally believe you.
> > >
> > > Are you incapable of a search yourself? I know it's there, you don't. You
> > > can't know something does not exist until you look.
> >
> > Son, _you_ are saying it’s there. So you can’t produce it? That
> > doesn’t
> > mean that it’s not there. It does mean that it’s up to me to evaluate
> > the
> > likelihood of my finding it without wasting too much time. Particularly as
> > your excuse for not producing it is that it would take you too much time and
> > trouble. You know what it is that you’re looking for, and it’ll take you
> > too much time to find it? Hmm.
> >
> > Suuuuure it exists. Suuuure you just don’t have it. Suuuure. I believe
> > you.
> >
> > I also have a bridge for sale. Cheap.
>
> If you hear on the news there's something happening and you don't believe it,
> do you research it yourself or phone them up?

not even remotely the same thing. And I would evaluate the source. If the
source keeps dodging, why then I have a pretty good idea of whether to
believe them or not.

Hint: you keep dodging.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>
>> NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
>> cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.
>>
>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>
>>>> NOTE: OP shotgun multi-posted to more than 3 newsgroups. My reply was
>>>> submitted to only the relevant newsgroups. Following newsgroups were
>>>> omitted in my reply:
>>>>
>>>> uk.legal
>>>
>>> Readded, why is this not to do with legalities?
>>>
>>>> sci.electronics.basics
>>>
>>> A CPU is electronic you utter nitwit.
>>
>> Cross-posting to more than 3 newsgroups violates netiquette.
>
> If it shouldn't be done, it's odd how every newsreader allows it.
>
> I post to groups where I think people will give an answer or be interested.
>
>> Doesn't how many you contrive are on-topic. Some netizens consider more than 2
>> to be excessive.
>
> Using the word netizen indicates you're a freak.
>
>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^___ You don't own nor have permission to
>>>> use this registered & active domain.
>>>
>>> They should have thought of that when they sold absolute shite.
>>
>> How is that relevant to the domain you used in your address field?
>
> I thought you were talking about spam.com, Hormel Food Corporation, that
> sells that disgusting waste product as food. I didn't realise you'd be
> stupid enough to think nospam.com was a company.
>
>>> I'll put whatever I want in there.
>>
>> Yep, the excuse of a troll.
>
> I'm not going to put my own address in there and receive spam am I?
>
>>> If anyone chooses to email it, they're the ones breaking the law.
>>
>> Oh, that law. Uh huh.
>
> Spam is illegal is it not? If not why not?
>
>> Hmm, a nitwit that has no knowlege of the .invalid TLD.
>
> I do, but see no point in using it.
>
>> Else, YOU are
>> the spammer energizing spam and other unsolicited messages to a domain
>> that isn't yours. Yep, trolls aren't known for being polite.
>
> It isn't anyone's, and I'm not the one sending the spam.
>
>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>
>>>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>>>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>>>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>>>> cycle before product launch.
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>>>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>>>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>>>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>>>> use.
>>>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>>>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>>>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>>>> by Intel
>>>>
>>>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>>>
>>> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
>>> given not loaned.

Try reading the text above more slowly this time. It is explicitly loaned.

>
>> Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
>> engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
>> returned?
>
> Doesn't matter to me. I've paid the money and I have the product, any
> theft that took place previously is not of my concern.

Your poor knowledge of basic UK law is concerning.
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/handling-stolen-goods-2/

Knowingly handling stolen goods is illegal.

Not knowing they're stolen doesn't mean you get to keep them. They will
rightfully be confiscated from you.

Kinsey,

Kid, reading your replies here there are just a couple of choices about you
:

You're either more than stupid and trying to convince yourself that stealing
isn't wrong as long as you decide that you doing it is actually someone
elses fault.

-or-

You're trolling the heck outof us.

Currently my bet is on the latter.

Goodbye.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 21:27:56 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 03/01/2022 21:23, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>
>>> Let me make this simple for your simple mind:
>>> I spot a car that's left unlocked. I point it out to you. You steal
>>> the car. Who's the theif?
>>
>> You are complicit where you are aiding and abetting the theft through
>> Joint Enterprise.
>
> Stop being such a pedantic fuckwit. There is no judge on this earth who
> would do me for saying to you, "hey that car's not locked".

They absolutely would if, based on the knowledge you gave, Fred stole it
and you did nothing to stop him.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/inchoate-offences

In fact, for serious crimes you could be prosecuted for simply suggesting a
criminal act even if that act never occurred.

Given your other post the police would laugh at how crap a criminal you
are. "Nah, mate you can't arrest me. See this gold bar? Bob stole it and
gave it to me. I also told bob the security van door was unlocked. So it's
mine and you can't do anything about it." "You're nicked, sunshine!" :D

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 09:19:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:
>
>> Kinsey,
>>
>>> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample,
>>> why would I have a problem?
>>
>> Still playing stupid I see ...
>>
>> Because you should be aware by now (if you wheren't already) that those
>> engineering sample CPU are not theirs to sell. When you than decide to buy
>> them anyway you would be *knowingly* be part of a theft.
>>
>> And that 'knowingly' part is something the Law does not take lightly. If
>> they would ever find out you would be forced to return the goods to the
>> actual owner - without getting your money back - and likely be "invited" to
>> spend some quality time in one of the Laws "relaxation centers".
>>
>> The positive side of that that the boarding, meals and doctor visits are
>> free. :-)
>
> Most people wouldn't know. If I buy a mower on Gumtree listed as 2nd
> hand and it was stolen, I can't be blamed for not knowing.

Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law. At the very least it would
be confiscated from you. And if the mower had "property of Intel" stamped
on it then you could be done for handling stolen goods.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:38:00 -0000, Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:

> On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> (in article <op.1fhl67efmvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
>
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 19:56:50 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
>> > (in article <op.1fhjhxcumvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
>> >
>> > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:27:46 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
>> > > > (in article <op.1fhhfkjlmvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:23:40 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
>> > > > > > (in article <op.1fhgyioamvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael
>> > > > > > > Ejercito<MEjercit@hotmail.com>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available>
>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Kinsey,
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
>> > > > > > > > Is there evidence of this?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > GIYF.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > That would seem to indicate that the answer is ’no’.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > No, it means I can't be bothered trawling through my internet history to
>> > > > > find
>> > > > > where I read it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Yeah. Right. I totally believe you.
>> > >
>> > > Are you incapable of a search yourself? I know it's there, you don't. You
>> > > can't know something does not exist until you look.
>> >
>> > Son, _you_ are saying it’s there. So you can’t produce it? That
>> > doesn’t
>> > mean that it’s not there. It does mean that it’s up to me to evaluate
>> > the
>> > likelihood of my finding it without wasting too much time. Particularly as
>> > your excuse for not producing it is that it would take you too much time and
>> > trouble. You know what it is that you’re looking for, and it’ll take you
>> > too much time to find it? Hmm.
>> >
>> > Suuuuure it exists. Suuuure you just don’t have it. Suuuure.. I believe
>> > you.
>> >
>> > I also have a bridge for sale. Cheap.
>>
>> If you hear on the news there's something happening and you don't believe it,
>> do you research it yourself or phone them up?
>
> not even remotely the same thing. And I would evaluate the source. If the
> source keeps dodging, why then I have a pretty good idea of whether to
> believe them or not.
>
> Hint: you keep dodging.

Nope, I know it to be true, I can't be bothered searching a second time, you search a first time.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:45:32 -0000, Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey Raving Lunatic wrote:
> ====================
> >
>> >> >> But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.
>> >> >
>> >> > ** The situations are parallel.
>> >> >
>> >> > In both cases the items were not meant for sale for good reasons.
>> >> > And assholes like YOU wanted to circumvent that decision for their own benefit.
>> >>
>> >> No,
>> >
>> > ** Yes - you fucking LIAR
>
>> Again, "my question was about selling them as engineering samples",
>
> ** With a caveat they were not for sale as they may contain defects.
> Exactly like the 20 amps I cited.
> FOAD you pig headed troll.

If the buyer knows what they're getting, there's no problem.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:47:16 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>
>>> NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
>>> cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.
>>>
>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>>
>>>>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>>>>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>>>>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>>>>> cycle before product launch.
>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>>>>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>>>>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>>>>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>>>>> use.
>>>>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>>>>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>>>>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>>>>> by Intel
>>>>>
>>>>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>>>>
>>>> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
>>>> given not loaned.
>
> Try reading the text above more slowly this time. It is explicitly loaned.

If they never take them back, it's not a loan. Can you loan me your mower forever? No, that's called a gift.

>>> Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
>>> engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
>>> returned?
>>
>> Doesn't matter to me. I've paid the money and I have the product, any
>> theft that took place previously is not of my concern.
>
> Your poor knowledge of basic UK law is concerning.
> https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/handling-stolen-goods-2/
>
> Knowingly handling stolen goods is illegal.
>
> Not knowing they're stolen doesn't mean you get to keep them. They will
> rightfully be confiscated from you.

It's not rightfull. The person who stole them should be made to reimburse me.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:49:44 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:

> Kinsey,
>
> Kid, reading your replies here there are just a couple of choices about you
> :
>
>
> You're either more than stupid and trying to convince yourself that stealing
> isn't wrong as long as you decide that you doing it is actually someone
> elses fault.
>
> -or-
>
> You're trolling the heck outof us.
>
>
> Currently my bet is on the latter.
>
> Goodbye.

You need to learn what stealing is. For example, copying a CD of Metallica isn't stealing.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 21:03:12 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 09:19:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:
>>
>>> Kinsey,
>>>
>>>> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample,
>>>> why would I have a problem?
>>>
>>> Still playing stupid I see ...
>>>
>>> Because you should be aware by now (if you wheren't already) that those
>>> engineering sample CPU are not theirs to sell. When you than decide to buy
>>> them anyway you would be *knowingly* be part of a theft.
>>>
>>> And that 'knowingly' part is something the Law does not take lightly. If
>>> they would ever find out you would be forced to return the goods to the
>>> actual owner - without getting your money back - and likely be "invited" to
>>> spend some quality time in one of the Laws "relaxation centers".
>>>
>>> The positive side of that that the boarding, meals and doctor visits are
>>> free. :-)
>>
>> Most people wouldn't know. If I buy a mower on Gumtree listed as 2nd
>> hand and it was stolen, I can't be blamed for not knowing.
>
> Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law. At the very least it would
> be confiscated from you. And if the mower had "property of Intel" stamped
> on it then you could be done for handling stolen goods.

Ignorance does not imply guilt. Property of Intel only means it used to be belong to them. For example I've sold dozens of computers from my work, still with such labels on them. I was saving them money by not having them charged for recycling, while getting some cash on Ebay.

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:47:16 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>
>>>> NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
>>>> cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.
>>>>
>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>>>>>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>>>>>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>>>>>> cycle before product launch.
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>>>>>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>>>>>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>>>>>> use.
>>>>>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>>>>>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>>>>>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>>>>>> by Intel
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>>>>>
>>>>> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
>>>>> given not loaned.
>>
>> Try reading the text above more slowly this time. It is explicitly loaned.
>
> If they never take them back, it's not a loan. Can you loan me your
> mower forever? No, that's called a gift.

Incorrect.

>>>> Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
>>>> engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
>>>> returned?
>>>
>>> Doesn't matter to me. I've paid the money and I have the product, any
>>> theft that took place previously is not of my concern.
>>
>> Your poor knowledge of basic UK law is concerning.
>> https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/handling-stolen-goods-2/
>>
>> Knowingly handling stolen goods is illegal.
>>
>> Not knowing they're stolen doesn't mean you get to keep them. They will
>> rightfully be confiscated from you.
>
> It's not rightfull. The person who stole them should be made to reimburse me.

Lol. You can always try to sue them. Good luck with that...

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 21:03:12 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 09:19:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Kinsey,
>>>>
>>>>> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample,
>>>>> why would I have a problem?
>>>>
>>>> Still playing stupid I see ...
>>>>
>>>> Because you should be aware by now (if you wheren't already) that those
>>>> engineering sample CPU are not theirs to sell. When you than decide to buy
>>>> them anyway you would be *knowingly* be part of a theft.
>>>>
>>>> And that 'knowingly' part is something the Law does not take lightly. If
>>>> they would ever find out you would be forced to return the goods to the
>>>> actual owner - without getting your money back - and likely be "invited" to
>>>> spend some quality time in one of the Laws "relaxation centers".
>>>>
>>>> The positive side of that that the boarding, meals and doctor visits are
>>>> free. :-)
>>>
>>> Most people wouldn't know. If I buy a mower on Gumtree listed as 2nd
>>> hand and it was stolen, I can't be blamed for not knowing.
>>
>> Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law. At the very least it would
>> be confiscated from you. And if the mower had "property of Intel" stamped
>> on it then you could be done for handling stolen goods.
>
> Ignorance does not imply guilt.

Only if it is reasonable. Buying a 2nd hand mower on gumtree is one thing,
but buying something you know to be suspect is another. The very fact you
posted here asking the question is implicit admission of the fact.

On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
(in article <op.1fhqkfr8mvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):

> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:38:00 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
>
> > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> > (in article <op.1fhl67efmvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
> >
> > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 19:56:50 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> > > > (in article <op.1fhjhxcumvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:27:46 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> > > > > > (in article <op.1fhhfkjlmvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 18:23:40 -0000, Wolffan<akwolffan@zoho.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 2022 Jan 04, Commander Kinsey wrote
> > > > > > > > (in article <op.1fhgyioamvhs6z@ryzen.lan>):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael
> > > > > > > > > Ejercito<MEjercit@hotmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Commander Kinsey wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser
> > > > > > > > > > > <address@not.available>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kinsey,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
> > > > > > > > > > Is there evidence of this?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > GIYF.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > That would seem to indicate that the answer is ’no’.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No, it means I can't be bothered trawling through my internet history
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > find
> > > > > > > where I read it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah. Right. I totally believe you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you incapable of a search yourself? I know it's there, you don't. You
> > > > > can't know something does not exist until you look.
> > > >
> > > > Son, _you_ are saying it’s there. So you can’t produce it? That
> > > > doesn’t
> > > > mean that it’s not there. It does mean that it’s up to me to evaluate
> > > > the
> > > > likelihood of my finding it without wasting too much time. Particularly as
> > > > your excuse for not producing it is that it would take you too much time
> > > > and
> > > > trouble. You know what it is that you’re looking for, and it’ll take
> > > > you
> > > > too much time to find it? Hmm.
> > > >
> > > > Suuuuure it exists. Suuuure you just don’t have it. Suuuure. I believe
> > > > you.
> > > >
> > > > I also have a bridge for sale. Cheap.
> > >
> > > If you hear on the news there's something happening and you don't believe
> > > it,
> > > do you research it yourself or phone them up?
> >
> > not even remotely the same thing. And I would evaluate the source. If the
> > source keeps dodging, why then I have a pretty good idea of whether to
> > believe them or not.
> >
> > Hint: you keep dodging.
>
> Nope, I know it to be true, I can't be bothered searching a second time, you
> search a first time.

and another dodge. your credibility wanes.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 22:49:09 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:47:16 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
>>>>> cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.
>>>>>
>>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>>>>>>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>>>>>>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>>>>>>> cycle before product launch.
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>>>>>>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>>>>>>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>>>>>>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>>>>>>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>>>>>>> by Intel
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
>>>>>> given not loaned.
>>>
>>> Try reading the text above more slowly this time. It is explicitly loaned.
>>
>> If they never take them back, it's not a loan. Can you loan me your
>> mower forever? No, that's called a gift.
>
> Incorrect.

Do you not understand what loan means? It means you temporarily are allowed possession of my thing.

>>>>> Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
>>>>> engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
>>>>> returned?
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't matter to me. I've paid the money and I have the product, any
>>>> theft that took place previously is not of my concern.
>>>
>>> Your poor knowledge of basic UK law is concerning.
>>> https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/handling-stolen-goods-2/
>>>
>>> Knowingly handling stolen goods is illegal.
>>>
>>> Not knowing they're stolen doesn't mean you get to keep them. They will
>>> rightfully be confiscated from you.
>>
>> It's not rightfull. The person who stole them should be made to reimburse me.
>
> Lol. You can always try to sue them. Good luck with that...

You can actually. If you tell the police to ask the judge/magistrate, they can award money to those who lost out, taking it from the thief.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 22:49:37 -0000, Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

> Raving Lunatic Arsehole Commander Kinsey wrote:
> =========================================
>> > Brian Gaff Shithead Troll puked:
>> >> > =============================
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I've only seen this one post, but I know pre production models of things
>> >> >> can slip out for whatever reason.
>> >> >
>> >> > ** No you don't.
>> >> >
>> >> >> I had a computer once where the pcb had
>> >> >> been manufactured with a fault, tend you can clearly see back then where the
>> >> >> tracks had been manually cut and wires bridged the contacts to the right
>> >> >> places, leaving the tracks as orphans.
>> >> >
>> >> > ** So fucking what ? That is not an example..
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> Likewise a number of Sinclair ZX Spectrums in the early days were made with
>> >> >> known faulty ULA chips and a logic chip glued to the surface with its legs
>> >> >> splayed and wired to make the circuit work.
>> >> >
>> >> > ** Still very much meant to be sold - so not a failed prototype.
>> >> >
>> >> >> The first batch of Phillips CD100s the very first CD player on the market
>> >> >> had quite a lot of wires cut tracks and components wired in odd ways inside
>> >> >> it. I have to say that none of these what we might call bodges ever caused
>> >> >> any trouble during the lives of the products.
>> >> >
>> >> > ** Just destroyed your own bullshit case.
>> >>
>> >> Do grow up.
>> >>
>> > ** You need to stop fucking your elderly mom.
>
>> Thanks for reinforcing your childishness.
>
> ** But you need to stop mother fucking - really.

Don't be such a prude.

>> >> And if you're going to insult someone, you need to post it to the group he reads it in.
>> >
>> > ** The "reply all '' icon works for me.
>> > Fuckhead.
>
>> No, it's broken.
>
> ** Tell Google Groups, not me.

ROTFPMSL! You use google groups?! Get a real newsreader you stupid newbie. I think I ought to killfile anyone using that shite.

>> You're only posting to one group, and he isn't in it.
>
> ** But *strangely* his words are .... and he reacted to my post.

AFAIK he's only in alt.computer.workshop. I often re-add the groups you delete, so he probably saw my post, not yours.

> Leave that old lady alone you cruel pervert.
> =================================

Don't be such a prude, they enjoy it.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 22:53:28 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 21:03:12 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 09:19:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Kinsey,
>>>>>
>>>>>> They clearly say sample on them. If I bought one knowing it's a sample,
>>>>>> why would I have a problem?
>>>>>
>>>>> Still playing stupid I see ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Because you should be aware by now (if you wheren't already) that those
>>>>> engineering sample CPU are not theirs to sell. When you than decide to buy
>>>>> them anyway you would be *knowingly* be part of a theft.
>>>>>
>>>>> And that 'knowingly' part is something the Law does not take lightly. If
>>>>> they would ever find out you would be forced to return the goods to the
>>>>> actual owner - without getting your money back - and likely be "invited" to
>>>>> spend some quality time in one of the Laws "relaxation centers".
>>>>>
>>>>> The positive side of that that the boarding, meals and doctor visits are
>>>>> free. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Most people wouldn't know. If I buy a mower on Gumtree listed as 2nd
>>>> hand and it was stolen, I can't be blamed for not knowing.
>>>
>>> Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law. At the very least it would
>>> be confiscated from you. And if the mower had "property of Intel" stamped
>>> on it then you could be done for handling stolen goods.
>>
>> Ignorance does not imply guilt.
>
> Only if it is reasonable. Buying a 2nd hand mower on gumtree is one thing,
> but buying something you know to be suspect is another. The very fact you
> posted here asking the question is implicit admission of the fact.

But most buyers will not.

On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 22:54:19 -0000, Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey Raving Lunatic wrote:
> ==============================
>> > >
>> >> >> >> But my question was about selling them as engineering samples.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ** The situations are parallel.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > In both cases the items were not meant for sale for good reasons.
>> >> >> > And assholes like YOU wanted to circumvent that decision for their own benefit.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No,
>> >> >
>> >> > ** Yes - you fucking LIAR
>> >
>> >> Again, "my question was about selling them as engineering samples",
>> >
>> > ** With a caveat they were not for sale as they may contain defects.
>> > Exactly like the 20 amps I cited.
>> > FOAD you pig headed troll.
>>
>> If the buyer knows what they're getting,
>>
> ** Fake use of "if" condition.

"If" is a pretty simple word, why do you have a problem with it? Plenty are sold clearly stating "engineering sample".

> Just like ALL your narcissistic, fucked up, fake reasoning.
>
> FOAD - asshole.

Your anger only goes to show you're losing the argument.

Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael Ejercito
> <MEjercit@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.
>>>
>>> Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
>>>
>> Is there evidence of this?
>
> GIYF.
>

I humbly accept your concession.

Michael

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 22:49:09 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:47:16 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
>>>>>> cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>>>>>>>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>>>>>>>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>>>>>>>> cycle before product launch.
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>>>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>>>>>>>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>>>>>>>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>>>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>>>>>>>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>>>>>>>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>>>>>>>> by Intel
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
>>>>>>> given not loaned.
>>>>
>>>> Try reading the text above more slowly this time. It is explicitly loaned.
>>>
>>> If they never take them back, it's not a loan. Can you loan me your
>>> mower forever? No, that's called a gift.
>>
>> Incorrect.
>
> Do you not understand what loan means? It means you temporarily are
> allowed possession of my thing.

A loan term can be indefinite.

>>>>>> Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
>>>>>> engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
>>>>>> returned?
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't matter to me. I've paid the money and I have the product, any
>>>>> theft that took place previously is not of my concern.
>>>>
>>>> Your poor knowledge of basic UK law is concerning.
>>>> https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/handling-stolen-goods-2/
>>>>
>>>> Knowingly handling stolen goods is illegal.
>>>>
>>>> Not knowing they're stolen doesn't mean you get to keep them. They will
>>>> rightfully be confiscated from you.
>>>
>>> It's not rightfull. The person who stole them should be made to reimburse me.
>>
>> Lol. You can always try to sue them. Good luck with that...
>
> You can actually. If you tell the police to ask the judge/magistrate,
> they can award money to those who lost out, taking it from the thief.

Only the original victim of the theft. Not subsequent buyers of the stolen
goods.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2022 03:26:00 -0000, Michael Ejercito <MEjercit@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael Ejercito
>> <MEjercit@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.
>>>>
>>>> Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
>>>>
>>> Is there evidence of this?
>>
>> GIYF.
>
> I humbly accept your concession.

I have done no such thing. I know the answer is there, I will not waste time finding it again because you can't be bothered using a search engine.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2022 09:01:15 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 22:49:09 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:47:16 -0000, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 23:49:48 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> NOTE: Continued excessive cross-posting thwarted. Number of
>>>>>>> cross-posted newsgroups reduced from 4 to 2.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Commander Kinsey <CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:55:47 -0000, VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why are engineering sample CPUs illegal to sell?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000056190/processors.html
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment
>>>>>>>>> manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and
>>>>>>>>> independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design
>>>>>>>>> cycle before product launch.
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
>>>>>>>>> - Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
>>>>>>>>> - Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan
>>>>>>>>> agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and
>>>>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>>>> - Are not for sale or resale.
>>>>>>>>> - May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
>>>>>>>>> Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported
>>>>>>>>> by Intel
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You can rent a car. You can test drive a demo. It's NOT your car.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Intel don't ask for it back like the car rental place does. It's
>>>>>>>> given not loaned.
>>>>>
>>>>> Try reading the text above more slowly this time. It is explicitly loaned.
>>>>
>>>> If they never take them back, it's not a loan. Can you loan me your
>>>> mower forever? No, that's called a gift.
>>>
>>> Incorrect.
>>
>> Do you not understand what loan means? It means you temporarily are
>> allowed possession of my thing.
>
> A loan term can be indefinite.

Bullshit. A loan is a gift with a return date.

>>>>>>> Oh, did YOU happen to get all the paperwork allowing you to possess the
>>>>>>> engineering sample to definitely know the samples were not to be
>>>>>>> returned?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't matter to me. I've paid the money and I have the product, any
>>>>>> theft that took place previously is not of my concern.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your poor knowledge of basic UK law is concerning.
>>>>> https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/handling-stolen-goods-2/
>>>>>
>>>>> Knowingly handling stolen goods is illegal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not knowing they're stolen doesn't mean you get to keep them. They will
>>>>> rightfully be confiscated from you.
>>>>
>>>> It's not rightfull. The person who stole them should be made to reimburse me.
>>>
>>> Lol. You can always try to sue them. Good luck with that...
>>
>> You can actually. If you tell the police to ask the judge/magistrate,
>> they can award money to those who lost out, taking it from the thief.
>
> Only the original victim of the theft. Not subsequent buyers of the stolen
> goods.

I am a victim of him selling stolen goods.

On 05/01/2022 18:15, Commander Kinsey wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Jan 2022 03:26:00 -0000, Michael Ejercito
> <MEjercit@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael Ejercito
>>> <MEjercit@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
>>>>>
>>>>     Is there evidence of this?
>>>
>>> GIYF.
>>
>>     I humbly accept your concession.
>
> I have done no such thing.  I know the answer is there, I will not waste
> time finding it again because you can't be bothered using a search engine.

In other words you can't find any evidence.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2022 18:27:21 -0000, Fredxx <fredxx@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> On 05/01/2022 18:15, Commander Kinsey wrote:
>> On Wed, 05 Jan 2022 03:26:00 -0000, Michael Ejercito
>> <MEjercit@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 04 Jan 2022 15:26:40 -0000, Michael Ejercito
>>>> <MEjercit@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Commander Kinsey wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 03 Jan 2022 19:27:53 -0000, R.Wieser <address@not.available>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Simple : you're not allowed to sell what you do not own.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course you own it, they don't want them back.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Is there evidence of this?
>>>>
>>>> GIYF.
>>>
>>> I humbly accept your concession.
>>
>> I have done no such thing. I know the answer is there, I will not waste
>> time finding it again because you can't be bothered using a search engine.
>
> In other words you can't find any evidence.

No, I found it previously and am not going to pander to your needs.