Re: Mimic Spartan(s) for me!

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Ernest replied (to my post):

>"Michael J. Mahon" <mjmahon@aol.com> wrote in message
>20010512014820.15897.00002532@ng-mb1.aol.com">news:20010512014820.15897.00002532@ng-mb1.aol.com...
...
>> Hmmm.  When I looked at the web page you supplied:
>>
>> >http://www.applefritter.com/appleclones/spartan/index.html
>>
>> I found the following quote from the software developer:
>>
>> "The software features of the Spartan included a compatible Applesoft
>BASIC --
>> very compatible, since it was created by disassembling the binary from the
>the
>> Applesoft ROM and reordering assembly level instructions so that the
>binary
>> image of the software would be different, but behavior when run would be
>> identical."
>>
>> Now that isn't what I'd call a "clean room" reproduction.  In fact, it's
>very
>> clearly a "derived work" and subject to the same prohibitions that put
>> Franklin out of business.  Just two differences:  1)  It's marginally
>harder
>> to demonstrate that the code is copied--even down to the bugs (!), and
>> 2) you'd have to fight Microsoft as well as Apple!  Just as well that
>Mimic
>> never got to be very big on the radar screen...
>
>You're right, I guess I should go and destroy them now, huh -and to think, I
>was actually excited about getting this stuff for a minute there. Boy, that
>was a close one. Thanks, and I'll be sure to call him a turd for you, OK.

No need to get huffy.  ;-)  I was not taking a position, just pointing out
the facts.  There's a lot of contempt around these parts for "sector edits",
yet this developer admits that he was doing essentially that to the ROMs.