Re: Attempts to ban constructive criticism...

[rder@pro-palmtree.cts.com (Richard Der)]

David Edwards <none@nowhere.gone> wrote:
>Nathan Mates wrote:
>>    Joe Kohn/SSII still sells Atarisoft originals (shrinkwrapped,
>>new), incluing Pac-Man. Guess what. The index file said that there's
>>a file pub/apple_II/images/games/action/Pac_Man.dsk.gz, and that
>>file existed last time I checked. No, I didn't bother downloading to
>>verify it, but are the odds pretty darn good that it's Pac-Man? You
>>bet. Thus, condition 1 fails your test.
>
>Open up your eyes and ears, bozo. Commercially available, in this
>case, is in reference to the fact that the software in question IS
>NO LONGER BEING PRODUCED by the parent company. There will always
>be originals available, but this is existing stock. And even if the
>Atarisoft originals above are being produced by someone as new
>product, that does not mean that EVERYTHING else in the software
>universe "fails your test" as you put it.
 
Now wait a minute, this sounds like an attempt to start a flame
war. Nathan brought out some valid points. Commercially available
does not mean "no longer produced" it means no new (shrink-wrapped)
units still being sold. If I were a furniture maker and I stopped
making a model of chair for 10 years, Joe Kohn offers to buy the
remaining inventory of these old chairs and retail them, does that
mean that just because they are "no longer produced" that you can
go into his backyard and steal the chairs? No.
 
As to everything else in Asimov, if I hung on to the chairs and
they are useless to me and I put them in my backyard, does that
give the right to some thief to sneak in and steal them? They might
be useless to me, but what they are doing is still robbery. If they
asked me first, I might have donated them, but their taking without
asking is stealing.
 
This is what is happening at Asimov. First, they are stealing
commercially available titles like Joe Kohn's. Second, for titles
not being sold, they don't even bother trying to contact the
makers of the software. How do they KNOW that the author dosn't
care about it.
 
 
>I guess we are to never again experience the fun of some of this
>older software, if we are to allow Nazi Mates and his bunch of
>goosesteppers have their way.
 
If you are attempting to start a flame war just because you disagree
with someone, we are not interested.
 
As for the software in question, that is what this discussion is
intended to do. We are coming up with ways to bring Asimov "into
the light." If Asimov is legit and the software is granted by the
author/publisher freeware status, it becomes a legal entity that
everyone can experience. What is better, the "cracked" stuff at
Asimov with effaced credits or the genuine article like Paul Lotus'
AppleWriter which is now officially freeware and may be freely
distributed anywhere?
 
Does Asimov even try to contact the copyright holders? No. Do they
clearly post that what they have is not PD? No. Asimov can use a
lot of improvement and others have suggested ways that it may
become legit.
 
 
>It 10 year old software for a dead system, and no one cares about
>the
 
With an attitude like that, you'd wonder why anyone would consider
making software for us. Just because _you_ think it is a dead system
does not mean "no one cares about" it. Why do you think we are here
in the first place? We are not here to flame. We are here because we
care about the Apple II.


-----
The Palmtree BBS  310-453-8726 v.32
Inet: rder@pro-palmtree.cts.com