Re: the status of Apple system software & vogon hypocrisy

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Frank Townsend writes ...
> 
 ...

> But someone reading the statute might reasonably
> conclude that copying the ROM code to use it in a computer is a 
> permissible activity.
>

     Someone could try; but, it would be a waste of time. The statute you
mention clearly applies to software and, at that, under very limited
circumstances.

 
> If you like, I *could* argue the other way (for a price, of course;-))
>

     I shall definitely need to consider that!



> However, I am a little confused now: are you arguing that this kind of
> copying by an owner is illegal, but obtaining copies of copyrighted
> software from FTP sites is legal?
 ....

     No. There is essentially no difference in "legality" between the
activities-- i.e. downloading old out of print commercial software and
downloading/transferring old Apple ROMs.

     Since there is no official public permission, both activities,
technically, qualify as copyright violations. However, neither activity
damages the value of the property (in both situations, nearly zero). In fact,
everyone, including the rights owners, benefits. So, really, we are talking
about a reasonable taking of liberties with the properties.

     Whether you call the activities "violations" or "taking liberties", the
vast majority of users sees nothing wrong with downloading ancient out of
print software and firmware. The same goes for transferring old ROM code for
use with an emulator.

     The point in identifying ROM code and, possibly, other copyright
violations is to demonstrate that those who attack archives and call users
"pirates" will excuse, 'crawfish', or otherwise ignore what they call
"piracy" when it is practiced by themselves or members of their own clique.
Once you know this, it is much easier to set aside their moral posturing and
just evaluate the facts.



Rubywand