Re: Abandonware petition

[Roy Miller <millers@inebraska.com>]

Sheldon Simms wrote:

> Im Artikel <3B577550.D55348E0@iliveinnebraska.com> schrieb "Roy Miller"
> <millers@iliveinnebraska.com>:
>
> > Thanks Brendon, I'd wondered about that. Now there's simple reasonable
> > answer.
>
> Interestingly enough, it's the exact same answer that has been given
> over and over again in general terms

Exact same = general terms ??  Since when?

And, in this case, it certainly isn't true.

> with respect to such software.
> There was absolutely nothing new in what Brendon said except that
> he has personal knowledge of one specific case of what has always
> been asserted: that obscure legal problems prevent companies from
> releasing old software as freeware or public domain even though they
> don't give a rip if people copy it.

Actually there "absolutely" was something new. Something that hasn't been posted
here in the two years that I've been reading csa2.

What was that new "thing"? It wasn't "The companies don't care if people copy."
It was that they are not willing to spend money to see if products that they
acquired in buyouts use routines or libraries that are copy righted by other
companies that might "not care" In short, they are VERY careful about copyrights
themselves, which is why they don't willy nilly release products. That's new.

It also has an interesting implication. If the author of a program would like to
see his/her program released, but doesn't own the rights any longer, all he/she
need do is prove to the current owner that all routines/libraries were their
own, or public domain. Then there is no legal issue for the company to have to
deal with.

Roy

>
>
> --
> sheldon@semanticedge.com  "The term (denotation t) denotes the object denoted
>                            by the object denoted by t." -- KIF