Rubywand wrote:
> For Apple II software copyright owners, the "known universe" need
> go no further than Csa2. Should Sierra, Activision, SSI, Origin,
> Interplay, ... wish to let everyone know that their old Apple II
> software should be removed from all major A2 archive sites, a posting
> here would pretty well get the job done. (Apple II may well be the only
> major home user platform for which this is true.)
Though it has never been easy getting copyright owners to re-release their
software, I agree that those companies you mentioned rolled-out a lot of
software for the Apple II.
Not forgetting that also there are also copyright owners who are willing to
give their consent to alot (but not all) of their titles. Good examples of
these are Penguin Software, Beagle Bros Software and Adventure International.
> Requiring specific permission to place each item on an archive is
> unworkable. All major archives maintain copyrighted software. No major
> archive tries to obtain specific permissions for each piece of software.
It is not 'unworkable' or 'impossible', it's a dream and it takes time. It
may not be as easy as 'taking candy from a baby', but there is certainly NO
HARM in asking.
I really do not want to be involved in a debate of w@r3z sites. Personally,
many of us would rather see that a piece of software can be downloaded without
fear of infringement of Copyright laws.
> If you want some idea of the enormous effort required to contact
> and deal with copyright holders, ask Willie or Dr. Tom. For an
> indication of what would be available, check Willie's list.
Ask Charles Turley, he will give you a much broader idea how difficult it
is. Of course, many of us keep an eye peeled for any additions.
Treasure Chest Project is set up as an alternative, it is not a host of
files, but rather list of programs that have been given permission to download
/ distributable freely. URL :
http://www.tals.dis.qut.edu.au/staff/willie/treasurechest
(On a note : Charles Turley has been credited as the person who brought
about the reclassification of LISA 816, it has been noted on the HQ page and
will be awaiting to be mirrored to the mirror sites.)
(Haunted House is credited to Michael Ackeret; and efforts have been
credited to Charles T., Sandy W & an unknownian for making it possible).
> Very few non-freeware, non-shareware copyright owners are likely to
> grant a specific permission. (I, probably, would not.) Granting
> permission in any verifiable form could be interpreted as a public
> declaration that you feel your product has no market value. Most
> commercial copyright owners appear to feel that anyone dumb enough to
> ask for permission deserves to be told "no".
That is subjective.
> Getting permission for every piece of software maintained is fantasy.
> If you want to see "life", connect with a few major archives.
And what did you think Treasure Chest Project is about ?
It is everyone's fantasy ! Who could have imagine that a piece of software
that you wanted to own for a long time is now avaliable for download freely ?
What I ask is, if you can contribute, just contribute. No one insist that
you must contribute in exchange. Treasure Chest Project does not restrict
anyone to enter into it's page in order to find out what can be downloaded. It
is a page that lists all those programs that at one stage you need to pay for
them in order to get them, which has been now, downloadable freely.
This is the big difference between Treasure Chest Project and 'a few major
archives'. Ground and Caltech archives exists for different reasons.