Re: Announcement: STM 0.85r available

[dwareing@apanix.apana.org.au (David Wareing)]

gt7344b@prism.gatech.edu (Michael P. Minori) writes:

>>Jawaid Bazyar (bazyar@netcom.com) wrote:
>>:   People, these are all COPYRIGHTED pieces of software. You are
>>: breaking the law if you transfer such software from the site.

>Preposterous.  What do you suggest?  We go down to our friendly
>neighborhood Egghead Software and ask if they still stock 13 year old
>games?  

>The argument against software piracy is:  ``You're stealing from the
>author.  If you copy a program from a friend, that's a lost sale for the
>software company.''

>Half the companies that wrote Apple ][ software no longer exist.  And
>those that are still around by no means produce Apple ][ stuff anymore.  

>So who's losing the sale?

You are a missing a major point. Copyright is not there just to prevent
piracy and lost sales. It allows the author to retain control of a work.
This is the author's (or other copyright holder's) right. 
 
So unless the copyright holder involved, publishes a statement to the
effect that his or her works may be made freely available, you should get
the copyright holder's permission before distributing his or her (old)
software. I believe, from other discussions on this, that those games that
have been available with STM, have been made available by their owners.
This is the right thing to do. And no, an owner of an old program does not
have to let you distribute his or her old games simply because it is
expedient for you.
 
I've used the Infocom example before, but it is relevant here. Infocom,
after some great success, went into decline for quite some time. Many
titles (if not all) were pulled off the shelf. At this stage, your
argument would say that it is "right" for people to distribute Infocom's
software freely, because there are no sales lost. However, Infocom titles
bounced back when CD-ROM became viable, and are now being published again.
 
So how about asking the copyright holder for permission to distribute
their software, instead of making your own assumptions about the
commercial viability of their product? As other folks have said, most of
these authors were only too willing to let their products be distributed.
But it is *their* choice, *not* yours.
 
--
David Wareing
Adelaide, South Australia
Mac Games & Multimedia Development        dwareing@apanix.apana.org.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------