Re: Regarding Asmiov (was: GS Icon file Verifier released)

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

johnlb@Primenet.Com (John Bowling) wrote:
>In article <gk08440@pro-palmtree.cts.com>,
>>
>>That is a good point. Actually, I agree with you that old software
>>should have an outlet. Let it be used and enjoyed rather than
>>languish and disappear. Comp.sys.apple2 users should take a consistent
>>stand, however. If we condone Asimov, should we turn around and
>>chastise others like Mr. Turley? Likewise, if we criticize Mr. Turley
>>for those pirating and sector editing incidents of a while back, we
>>should blast Asimov since it is doing this kind of thing on a grand
>>scale.
>
>So.... you feel that those who have emulators should be allowed to use
>old software, even if they may have never bought it.
 
Well, I think both sides have a point. The way Asimov is now, it is a
pirate site. The distribution of in print software like AppleWorks is
disturbing, but what else but pirating would the effacing of copyright
messages and credits from software be? However, Asimov is in a position
to provide a useful service in rescuing out of print software that
would otherwise languish and disappear.
 
I would like to see a "reformed" Asimov that strongly projects an
image similar to the "Lost Classics" project. It could be a bit more
lax: for example, if the publisher and the author both deny once
making the software, they could loose the program on their site with
a note that an attempt was made at obtaining permission but failed.
The reformed Asimov would never sector edit software to efface credits
and copyrights.
 
>And others feel that people with genuine Apples should not be allowed
>to use it unless they have paid for it.
 
They have a point. That is what this discussion is for, to put all
points of view on the table. Already, Dr. Tom has pointed out Asimov's
positive side, the rescuing of useful but out of print software.
However, as Nathan Mates correctly pointed out, Asimov is a pirate
site. What else would you call those who remove copyright messages
and credits? Nathan suggested a good first step in reforming the site;
split the legal software from the pirate stuff.
 
>I agree with the second concept, but inclusive of both genuine Apple
>users and emulators users.  Prove you have bought it!
 
That is a good suggestion. It might be hard to enforce, unless the
reformed Asimov has the resources to screen those looking for
software. Someone would have to accept email requests and then
research the validity of the user's claim of ownership and send
out the disk image when the claim is confirmed true.
 
>There is, however, one problem I have, in that software I have bought
>is copy protected, not hard-driveable, and the origional disk has gone
>bad. I can not longer get a replacement from the producer, yet, as a
>purchaser, I have full rights to a copy for no more than the costof
>duplication. This problem even includes games where the origional disk
>never worked, and they would have replaced it for a fee and shipping
>both ways. That total was more than I paid for it to begin with (from
>a retail store)!
>
>There is an integrity problem with software producers with the above
>problems, and because of this, while I don't like what goes on at
>asimov, if it can be a method of enforcing the integrity problem,
>more power to them.  And, yes, screw the producers who have left us
>in the lurch!!!!!!
 
That is a good point. Asimov IS in a position to do a valuable service
but the way it is now there is a problem (everyone agrees that they
have to clean up their act). This discussion is a good start in
coming up with ways to bring Asimov "into the light." Let us have all
sides express their views. This is a much better and more productive
topic than the flame war of the past. Same subject, different goals.


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