Re: Note to QC & PG

["Paul Grammens" <grammens@svn.net>]

Arkain <rwking@no.usa.spam.net> wrote in message
news:397c54c5$1@hal.grnco.net...
> You know, I just wanted to know what the terms meant. You've just proven
> that some things must be seen first hand to be fully understood. Now I
think
> I do.
>
> Vogon                Turlette
> ----------------     -------------
> Quantum_Cat          Paul Grammens
>

That's meaningless.  In fact, I'm a poor representative of the Turlette
faction. I have relatively little software, and I'm mostly interested in the
hardware. I do object to the constant attacks by the vogons against people
like Rubywand and Dr. Tom who happen to be the ones keeping the Apple II
going. Without their web sites and sharing of knowledge, people interested
in the Apple II platform would be far worse off.  The vogons contribute
little (and in the case of QC, NOTHING) to the sharing of knowledge which is
the purpose of this newsgroup.

Got that? Nothing would please me more than to see the end of this, I'm here
to learn more and share what I've learned about the Apple II.  But I've
decided to fight fire with fire. I'm not going to let the vogons monopolize
this forum and attack valuable contributors without feeling the flames
themselves.

The vogons have a monomania about possible copyright infringements of Apple
II abandonware.   As if, in a world of Napster and Chinese factories
churning out pirate copies of current software, this is of any importance.

> ...or at least that's the way it seemed in this argument.... That's right,
> ARGUMENT. What happened to the normalized discussions that lead to some
sort
> of reasonable solution??? You to are bantering over the legalities of some
> thing who's legal status is clearly known.

Ah, but it isn't. While most of the software I use such as Shrinkit and
Wolfenstein 3D explicitly state that they can be used and copied freely,
that's not what this is all about.  This is about situations where the
status isn't known. I'm not in favor of copying software that the copyright
holder is still selling or where the copyright holder objects.

These vogon kooks are extremists. For example, people have kindly sent me
copies of drivers for some of the old hardware I've scrounged.  I'm sure
that technically, that's a violation of of the copyright.  I'm not losing
any sleep over it, though, and no, I'm not going to research the current
copyright status and search the galaxy for the copyright holders to ask
their permission.

>
> IMNSHO, if the softawre has really been abandoned, then use it *AT YOUR
OWN
> RISK* and remove it if the copyright owner requests.

That's about the only intelligent sentence in your whole post. I agree with
that. Congratulations, you just joined the "pirates".

We really need to just
> get together and petition these companies to release their non-viable A2
> software to public domain so as to avoid all such inane issues.
>

Some people are doing that, and more power to them. That's not the issue.
The issue is software where the current copyright holder is not known, or if
known, doesn't express any interest. The vogons presume to speak for those
copyright holders. I say the the vogons should mind their own business.

You really have to wonder about the mental stability of people who view the
copying of ancient abandonware as a great concern, and rant on about it
repeatedly and at great length.  What a bunch of kooks...
-Paul