Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [TI-99/4A] Re: slighty OT: info on abandonware

Expand Messages
  • Dan Olson
    ... At the risk of getting a little off topic, this is another example of where compairing software and a car doesn t work. If you steel the car, you ve taken
    Message 1 of 25 , Feb 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Hal Shanafield wrote:

      > The thing is, Farmer Brown still OWNS the '52 Nash, and has the right
      > to do anything he wants with it. It is his property. If you want to
      > steal it, you can. Just don't demand that he give it to you just
      > because you want it. Software piracy is a lot simpler than trying to
      > start an old car, but should we expect authors to give up their
      > copyrights just because they aren't making any money from them? I

      At the risk of getting a little off topic, this is another example of
      where compairing software and a car doesn't work. If you steel the car,
      you've taken Farmer Brown's car and he'll never be able to restore and
      enjoy it. Piracy is like having a giant car photocopier, now you've got
      an exact duplicate of Farmer Brown's car, but he still has a copy sitting
      in the field. Making copies without permission takes away the owner's
      ability to make money from selling copies, but the owner still has the
      origional.

      Dan
    • Dan Olson
      ... You probably have to read the fine print but usually if you own a legal copy, you are able to make an archival copy on another media for your own use or
      Message 2 of 25 , Feb 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        > I know what I have is what I paid for once. To have it on a MASS
        > Transfer Format would be wonderful. So if I paid for my right to
        > use a program, would it be stealing if I again received the same
        > material in a different format that was neither available nor even
        > thought about at the time of the origial copyright.
        >
        > I don't think it would be stealing if I received any of the 208
        > programs and more counting Disks and Tapes I have, in a different
        > format. The author was already paid for "my" use of these program
        > once and by me personally. Anything above that he would be stealing
        > from me...

        You probably have to read the fine print but usually if you own a legal
        copy, you are able to make an "archival copy" on another media for your
        own use or backup purposes. Besides, almost all software you get now
        days, they expect that it'll get copied from the origional media to a hard
        drive when you install.

        Dan
      • Gregg Eshelman
        Ever notice how when someone mentions how a copyright holder that chooses to do nothing with their work is just letting it go to waste, someone ALWAYS tries to
        Message 3 of 25 , Feb 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Ever notice how when someone mentions how a copyright
          holder that chooses to do nothing with their work
          is just letting it go to waste, someone ALWAYS tries
          to claim the person that brought it up is saying
          that people should steal or copy it?

          DON'T PUT WORDS IN WHAT I WROTE THAT I DID NOT!

          I NEVER said that a program author that isn't offering
          it for sale should have it ripped off, stolen,
          "pirated" etc.

          To make it VERY SIMPLE for people who apparently can
          magically read words and meanings not written,

          Letting something you own rust away or gather dust
          in a file cabinet is a waste! Why not sell it
          (if it's a material object) or allow it to be copied
          and shared (for software)? It'll be enjoyed, restored,
          appreciated, used, and will make people happy.

          But if you choose to let what you have rot away, go
          ahead. You can't take it with you when you die.

          --- Dan Olson <dano@...> wrote:

          >
          >
          > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Hal Shanafield wrote:
          >
          > > The thing is, Farmer Brown still OWNS the '52
          > Nash, and has the right
          > > to do anything he wants with it. It is his
          > property. If you want to
          > > steal it, you can. Just don't demand that he give
          > it to you just
          > > because you want it. Software piracy is a lot
          > simpler than trying to
          > > start an old car, but should we expect authors to
          > give up their
          > > copyrights just because they aren't making any
          > money from them? I
          >
          > At the risk of getting a little off topic, this is
          > another example of
          > where compairing software and a car doesn't work.
          > If you steel the car,
          > you've taken Farmer Brown's car and he'll never be
          > able to restore and
          > enjoy it. Piracy is like having a giant car
          > photocopier, now you've got
          > an exact duplicate of Farmer Brown's car, but he
          > still has a copy sitting
          > in the field. Making copies without permission
          > takes away the owner's
          > ability to make money from selling copies, but the
          > owner still has the
          > origional.

          It will be total Fandemonium!
          August (Fri) 4th, (Sat) 5th & (Sun) 6th, 2006
          http://www.fandemonium.org

          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
          http://mail.yahoo.com
        • Dan Olson
          ... I hope you didn t think that I was somehow suggesting you said otherwise, as you replied to my message. I was just pointing out that software can be
          Message 4 of 25 , Feb 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            > DON'T PUT WORDS IN WHAT I WROTE THAT I DID NOT!
            >
            > I NEVER said that a program author that isn't offering
            > it for sale should have it ripped off, stolen,
            > "pirated" etc.

            I hope you didn't think that I was somehow suggesting you said otherwise,
            as you replied to my message. I was just pointing out that software can
            be duplicated in such a way that the owner doesn't wake up one morning
            to find their program is gone, just because someone "stole" it, as would
            be the case with a material object. Frankly, rather anyone on this list
            chooses to follow copyright laws or not is none of my business.

            Dan

            > To make it VERY SIMPLE for people who apparently can
            > magically read words and meanings not written,
            >
            > Letting something you own rust away or gather dust
            > in a file cabinet is a waste! Why not sell it
            > (if it's a material object) or allow it to be copied
            > and shared (for software)? It'll be enjoyed, restored,
            > appreciated, used, and will make people happy.
            >
            > But if you choose to let what you have rot away, go
            > ahead. You can't take it with you when you die.
            >
            > --- Dan Olson <dano@...> wrote:
            >
            >>
            >>
            >> On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Hal Shanafield wrote:
            >>
            >>> The thing is, Farmer Brown still OWNS the '52
            >> Nash, and has the right
            >>> to do anything he wants with it. It is his
            >> property. If you want to
            >>> steal it, you can. Just don't demand that he give
            >> it to you just
            >>> because you want it. Software piracy is a lot
            >> simpler than trying to
            >>> start an old car, but should we expect authors to
            >> give up their
            >>> copyrights just because they aren't making any
            >> money from them? I
            >>
            >> At the risk of getting a little off topic, this is
            >> another example of
            >> where compairing software and a car doesn't work.
            >> If you steel the car,
            >> you've taken Farmer Brown's car and he'll never be
            >> able to restore and
            >> enjoy it. Piracy is like having a giant car
            >> photocopier, now you've got
            >> an exact duplicate of Farmer Brown's car, but he
            >> still has a copy sitting
            >> in the field. Making copies without permission
            >> takes away the owner's
            >> ability to make money from selling copies, but the
            >> owner still has the
            >> origional.
            >
            > It will be total Fandemonium!
            > August (Fri) 4th, (Sat) 5th & (Sun) 6th, 2006
            > http://www.fandemonium.org
            >
            > __________________________________________________
            > Do You Yahoo!?
            > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            > http://mail.yahoo.com
            >
            >
            > For users/owners of TI-99/4A Geneve 9640 computers everywhere!
            > Visit the TI99'ers Hall of Fame at http://www.ti99hof.org
            > Check out the TI99ers On-Line User Group at http://www.ti99ers.org/home/.
            > Send abuse reports to abuse@...
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Rick
            Gregg: I have and one of the most noticeable ones of late is a Mac newsgroup reader named Thoth. While it still works in MacOS X, it is in need of updating. If
            Message 5 of 25 , Feb 2, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Gregg:

              I have and one of the most noticeable ones of late is a Mac newsgroup
              reader named Thoth. While it still works in MacOS X, it is in need of
              updating. If I knew how to reach the author, I would have done so by
              now as mail no longer gets forwarded when someone moves several times
              since his last release.

              I won't put words in your mouth that aren't there. I have this curious
              ability to read what is posted and not distort the meaning through
              wishful thinking or wishing to only read what I want to read in a message.

              Rick

              --- In ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com, Gregg Eshelman <g_alan_e@...> wrote:
              >
              > Ever notice how when someone mentions how a copyright
              > holder that chooses to do nothing with their work
              > is just letting it go to waste, someone ALWAYS tries
              > to claim the person that brought it up is saying
              > that people should steal or copy it?
              >
              > DON'T PUT WORDS IN WHAT I WROTE THAT I DID NOT!
              >
              > I NEVER said that a program author that isn't offering
              > it for sale should have it ripped off, stolen,
              > "pirated" etc.
              >
              > To make it VERY SIMPLE for people who apparently can
              > magically read words and meanings not written,
              >
              > Letting something you own rust away or gather dust
              > in a file cabinet is a waste! Why not sell it
              > (if it's a material object) or allow it to be copied
              > and shared (for software)? It'll be enjoyed, restored,
              > appreciated, used, and will make people happy.
              >
              > But if you choose to let what you have rot away, go
              > ahead. You can't take it with you when you die.
              >
              > --- Dan Olson <dano@...> wrote:
              >
              > >
              > >
              > > On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Hal Shanafield wrote:
              > >
              > > > The thing is, Farmer Brown still OWNS the '52
              > > Nash, and has the right
              > > > to do anything he wants with it. It is his
              > > property. If you want to
              > > > steal it, you can. Just don't demand that he give
              > > it to you just
              > > > because you want it. Software piracy is a lot
              > > simpler than trying to
              > > > start an old car, but should we expect authors to
              > > give up their
              > > > copyrights just because they aren't making any
              > > money from them? I
              > >
              > > At the risk of getting a little off topic, this is
              > > another example of
              > > where compairing software and a car doesn't work.
              > > If you steel the car,
              > > you've taken Farmer Brown's car and he'll never be
              > > able to restore and
              > > enjoy it. Piracy is like having a giant car
              > > photocopier, now you've got
              > > an exact duplicate of Farmer Brown's car, but he
              > > still has a copy sitting
              > > in the field. Making copies without permission
              > > takes away the owner's
              > > ability to make money from selling copies, but the
              > > owner still has the
              > > origional.
              >
              > It will be total Fandemonium!
              > August (Fri) 4th, (Sat) 5th & (Sun) 6th, 2006
              > http://www.fandemonium.org
              >
              > __________________________________________________
              > Do You Yahoo!?
              > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              > http://mail.yahoo.com
              >
            • twills44@cox.net
              Gregg, I don t recall anyone stating that you said such things that you stated below. It seems to me that what came up here was an interest in trying to get
              Message 6 of 25 , Feb 2, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Gregg,

                I don't recall anyone stating that you said such things that you stated below. It seems to me that what came up here was an interest in trying to get some of the old programs that are either "abandonware" or what I like to call "NeglectWare" back into circulation. I see nothing wrong with that, and I don't recall anyone stating you were advocating piracy. I believe I was probably the only one to mention pirating, and it was in reference to what brought us to the point we are at with "NeglectWare".

                This was/is a good thread. It has been civil and very active. Plus it has been a very intelligent discussion in my opinion. Hopefully we can get some of the old abandoned or neglected software back into circulation because of this thread. I hope some of the authors of older programs have seen this thread, or are at least aware of it, and that they will at least consider releasing their old programs to the community.

                Tom

                >
                > From: Gregg Eshelman <g_alan_e@...>
                > Date: 2006/02/02 Thu AM 12:29:56 EST
                > To: ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: Re: [TI-99/4A] Re: slighty OT: info on abandonware
                >
                > Ever notice how when someone mentions how a copyright
                > holder that chooses to do nothing with their work
                > is just letting it go to waste, someone ALWAYS tries
                > to claim the person that brought it up is saying
                > that people should steal or copy it?
                >
                > DON'T PUT WORDS IN WHAT I WROTE THAT I DID NOT!
                >
                > I NEVER said that a program author that isn't offering
                > it for sale should have it ripped off, stolen,
                > "pirated" etc.
                >
                > To make it VERY SIMPLE for people who apparently can
                > magically read words and meanings not written,
                >
                > Letting something you own rust away or gather dust
                > in a file cabinet is a waste! Why not sell it
                > (if it's a material object) or allow it to be copied
                > and shared (for software)? It'll be enjoyed, restored,
                > appreciated, used, and will make people happy.
                >
                > But if you choose to let what you have rot away, go
                > ahead. You can't take it with you when you die.
                >
                [snip]
              • Matthew Hagerty
                You are absolutely correct, this is just my opinion, overly optimistic as usual. ;-) Yes, the original author does have the right to do what they want with
                Message 7 of 25 , Feb 2, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  You are absolutely correct, this is just my opinion, overly optimistic
                  as usual. ;-) Yes, the original author does have the right to do what
                  they want with their work regardless of what you, or I, or anyone else
                  thinks is right or wrong.

                  > Think about it - they busted their hump on Program XYZ, released it,
                  sold a
                  > piddling few copies, watched it get copied and distributed six ways to
                  > Sunday, had to deal with the complaints of irate users (many who
                  didn't pay
                  > for it)... then years later, out of the woodwork, people start exhorting
                  > them to dump their work into the public domain "for the good of the
                  > community." Their opinion may be "what did the TI community ever do for
                  > me?" And they may have a point, not that there's anything to be
                  done about
                  > it now.

                  Well, no one forced them to bust their hump making software, it was a
                  business choice they made. Creating software has always gone hand in
                  hand with protecting your work in ways other than just some printed
                  symbol on the documentation. However, there is no such thing as 100%
                  protection, so anyone making software needs to understand this
                  *before* they spend months on a project. Piracy is a calculated risk
                  in a software business and must be accounted for. If piracy of your
                  software is going to bother you emotionally, then simply don't write
                  software. I'm not supporting piracy at all, but it is a fact of
                  software, like it or not. But don't let the bad apples ruin the pie
                  for the rest of us.

                  It was not me, or you, or any one of a great many people in this
                  current-day TI community who did the copying, so why should I suffer
                  for what people were doing 20 years ago? I never thought we were
                  asking the authors to give up their work to the common good of the
                  community... I'd gladly still pay for some TI software that was
                  valuable to me, if I had a way to do so.

                  Again, just my two cents.

                  Matthew


                  --- In ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com, "Keith Bergman" <kbergman@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > <I agree with you on this point, however, if someone holds rights to
                  > some piece of work that others can enjoy, they should not deny access
                  > to that work due to their own stubbornness if the work was originally
                  > created for others to use (and was indeed made available to others at
                  > some point in the past.) Also, expecting current prices for something
                  > that is 20 years old is unreasonable and greedy.>
                  >
                  > <snip>
                  >
                  > I think what Hal is saying (and what I agree with) is that it
                  doesn't really
                  > matter WHAT you, or I, or anyone but the original author, thinks.
                  > Statements like "they should not deny access" and "expecting current
                  prices
                  > is unreasonable" are your opinions. No matter how commonly held
                  they may
                  > be, the creator of the software has the right to be as
                  "unreasonable" as he
                  > wants. He made it, he owns it, and he can set up a lemonade stand
                  out front
                  > of his house and sell shrinkwrapped copies of it in clamshell boxes with
                  > full-color artwork for $99.99 if he wants. Our opinions of his
                  choices are
                  > just that - opinions - and have no bearing on anything, really.
                  >
                  > What isn't being said here is that we're all being pretty academic
                  on this
                  > point, and mainly because the longtime "disk swap" between friends
                  and on
                  > BBS's is now becoming more transparent and public as we move the 99/4a
                  > programming canon into the new media. The few 99'ers I've met
                  personally in
                  > the past have all had scads of copied software, Xeroxed docs, etc.
                  Some of
                  > them had file cabinet drawers full of more stuff than they were ever
                  even
                  > gonna look at or use. I think if anything, some of the authors from
                  back in
                  > the mid-80's and early 90's that balk at releasing their software to
                  PD are
                  > doing it out of a knee-jerk reaction to that earlier piracy.
                  >
                  > Think about it - they busted their hump on Program XYZ, released it,
                  sold a
                  > piddling few copies, watched it get copied and distributed six ways to
                  > Sunday, had to deal with the complaints of irate users (many who
                  didn't pay
                  > for it)... then years later, out of the woodwork, people start exhorting
                  > them to dump their work into the public domain "for the good of the
                  > community." Their opinion may be "what did the TI community ever do for
                  > me?" And they may have a point, not that there's anything to be
                  done about
                  > it now.
                  >
                  > Just because you want something doesn't mean it's the author's
                  obligation to
                  > give it to you, "reasonable" or not. And frankly, it's not like you
                  aren't
                  > gonna be able to get it some way or another.
                  >
                  > Keith
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Matthew
                  >
                  > --- In ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com, "Hal Shanafield" <hals12@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > The thing is, Farmer Brown still OWNS the '52 Nash, and has the right
                  > > to do anything he wants with it. It is his property. If you want to
                  > > steal it, you can. Just don't demand that he give it to you just
                  > > because you want it. Software piracy is a lot simpler than trying to
                  > > start an old car, but should we expect authors to give up their
                  > > copyrights just because they aren't making any money from them? I
                  > > retain the rights to all the stories and articles that I have
                  > > written, unless I have sold those rights to the various publications
                  > > in which they appeared. If someone were to reprint one of my pieces
                  > > without my permission, on the grounds "they couldn't find me," or
                  > > somesuch other reason, I would be mad as hell. I agree that many
                  > > software authors no longer regard their work as valuable, but that
                  > > doesn't give us the right to demand they surrender their rights to
                  > > their own creations. If someone wants to pirate software there is
                  > > little anyone can do about it, but let's not cloak that theft in high
                  > > moral purpose. We are not liberating software from some "prison," we
                  > > are stealing it. Just my two cents worth. --Hal
                  > > --- In ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com, Gregg Eshelman <g_alan_e@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > --- twills44@ wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > > My observation here is that most of this is really
                  > > > > opinion. I am researching this stuff, especially the
                  > > > > WIPO comments. I have passed to along to others for
                  > > > > more insight.
                  > > >
                  > > > Old software is much like an old car.
                  > > >
                  > > > 80 year old Farmer Brown has a 1952 Nash sitting out
                  > > > behind his
                  > > > barn. He's been "Gonna fix it up one of these days,
                  > > > ain't for
                  > > > sale!" for 40 years, "It's getting more valuable every
                  > > > year!"
                  > > > as it rusts into the ground.
                  > > >
                  > > > Companies and individual authors have lots of software
                  > > > that
                  > > > they haven't sold a copy of in a decade, yet they
                  > > > claim it's
                  > > > "worth a lot of money" and "One of these days I might
                  > > > decide to
                  > > > write a new and updated version." Meanwhile it sits
                  > > > there,
                  > > > doing nothing, nobody gets to see and use and
                  > > > appreciate it
                  > > > other than the people who bought copies years ago and
                  > > > the
                  > > > few of them that still use it.
                  > > >
                  > > > If it's not making the company or author any money and
                  > > > has
                  > > > approximately zero potential of ever producing another
                  > > > penny
                  > > > of income, why just sit on it and let it fade away
                  > > > into the
                  > > > mists of time?
                  > > >
                  > > > Then there's the "If people really wanted my old
                  > > > program, they'd
                  > > > pay for it!" Well, first you have to make it available
                  > > > to be
                  > > > bought. Not making old software available to be
                  > > > purchased,
                  > > > then complaining when people copy it and put it on the
                  > > > net is
                  > > > a bit hypocritical.
                  > > >
                  > > > Whomever currently owns the old Apogee and Epic
                  > > > Megagames titles
                  > > > does have them available for purchase, but I wonder
                  > > > how many
                  > > > copies they've actually sold? If you _do_ have your
                  > > > old software
                  > > > available for purchase, but nobody is buying, does it
                  > > > really
                  > > > still have any monetary value? Anything is only worth
                  > > > what
                  > > > people are willing to pay for it. I could start an
                  > > > eBay auction
                  > > > on a box of Kleenex with a $1,000 reserve, but it'll
                  > > > never
                  > > > sell because nobody will bid that much, therefore it's
                  > > > not
                  > > > worth $1,000. If nobody will pay $29.95 NOW for a game
                  > > > that
                  > > > was a hot seller in 1992 at $29.95, it's no longer
                  > > > worth $29.95
                  > > > no matter what the author thinks about it. They
                  > > > _might_ buy it
                  > > > at $5.95, might not.
                  > > >
                  > > > The software bargain bins at stores ought to be a
                  > > > gigantic
                  > > > clue to people and companies holding copyrights on old
                  > > > software.
                  > > > The "value" of their product had a finite lifespan and
                  > > > will
                  > > > never ever appreciate back up to its original sale price.
                  > > >
                  > > > It will be total Fandemonium!
                  > > > August (Fri) 4th, (Sat) 5th & (Sun) 6th, 2006
                  > > > http://www.fandemonium.org
                  > > >
                  > > > __________________________________________________
                  > > > Do You Yahoo!?
                  > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                  > > > http://mail.yahoo.com
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > For users/owners of TI-99/4A Geneve 9640 computers everywhere!
                  > Visit the TI99'ers Hall of Fame at http://www.ti99hof.org
                  > Check out the TI99ers On-Line User Group at
                  http://www.ti99ers.org/home/.
                  > Send abuse reports to abuse@...
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                • Matthew Hagerty
                  HAHA! Sorry, but that s funny! I laughed out loud. Matthew ... market. We are now reaping the
                  Message 8 of 25 , Feb 2, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    HAHA! Sorry, but that's funny! I laughed out loud.

                    Matthew


                    --- In ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com, TI Los <tilos@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Bill Gates would agree with you too.
                    >
                    >
                    > Tom Wills wrote:
                    > > So the authors, in effect, said "Screw You!" and took it off the
                    market. We are now reaping the
                    > > rewards of those who did all the pirating.
                    > >
                    > > -------Original Message-------
                    > >
                    > > From: Matthew Hagerty
                    > > Date: 02/01/06 17:27:30
                    > > To: ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com
                    > > Subject: [TI-99/4A] Re: slighty OT: info on abandonware
                    > >
                    > > I agree with you on this point, however, if someone holds rights to
                    > > some piece of work that others can enjoy, they should not deny access
                    > > to that work due to their own stubbornness if the work was originally
                    > > created for others to use (and was indeed made available to others at
                    > > some point in the past.) Also, expecting current prices for something
                    > > that is 20 years old is unreasonable and greedy.
                    > >
                    >
                  • Gregg Eshelman
                    ... Right here. I wrote nothing at all that would imply this. ... and has the right ... property. If you want to ... it to you just ... It will be total
                    Message 9 of 25 , Feb 4, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- twills44@... wrote:

                      > Gregg,
                      >
                      > I don't recall anyone stating that you said such
                      > things that you stated below.

                      Right here. I wrote nothing at all that would imply
                      this.

                      --- In ti99-4a@yahoogroups.com, "Hal Shanafield"
                      <hals12@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > The thing is, Farmer Brown still OWNS the '52 Nash,
                      and has the right
                      > to do anything he wants with it. It is his
                      property. If you want to
                      > steal it, you can. Just don't demand that he give
                      it to you just
                      > because you want it.

                      It will be total Fandemonium!
                      August (Fri) 4th, (Sat) 5th & (Sun) 6th, 2006
                      http://www.fandemonium.org

                      __________________________________________________
                      Do You Yahoo!?
                      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                      http://mail.yahoo.com
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.