Re: n...

[attrax <attrax@my-deja.com>]

I must admit that whenever this dreary old topic arises, as it does
regularly in various places, I am invariably perplexed by the
deafening silence from that pivotal group, the copyright holders.

What we always seem to observe are (apparently) self-appointed
spokespeople for the copyright holders, who make gross accusations
(presumably on behalf of the copyright holders) whilst seeming to be
without any obvious or stated imprimatur FROM the copyright holders.

They always act as though they WERE the aggrieved parties, and
usually have no hesitation in making offensive (and often actionable)
accusations against most others who express opposing viewpoints.

Where are the REAL aggrieved perties, and why are they silent ?

The urban myth that sites like Asimov systematically ignore the
entreaties of copyright holders is demonstably farcical.  One only
needs to look at how clinically efficient the Milano clan can be
in shutting down sites with the merest threat of litigation.

If not in court, why don't the copyright holders of old A2 programs
forcefully make their views known here, or at Delphi ...or anywhere ?

The is absolutely no doubt that if site operators like Helix
actually DID receive a valid objection about a program from the
copyright holder, it would be removed immediately from his site.

SO, if the REAL A2 copyright holders DON'T SEE THEMSELVES as
aggrieved parties, and have NO INTENTION of objecting, then what is
the point of the interminably boring thread, other than as a vehicle
for flames without purpose ?



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.