Re: Licensing, distributing Apple II system software, and II computing

[Roy and/or Janet Miller <millers@inetnebr.com>]

Rubywand wrote:

> Roy and/or Janet Miller wrote:
> >
> > Ah, but Sheppy is a *new* licensee. And as someone seeking to be an Apple licensee,
> > he needs to ask about the software that he would like to offer. Which he did. I'm
> > glad to know that he asked, I wish that Apple hadn't been so closed minded about
> > it, but as someone seeking to get a license, what he did, and the way he did it, is
> > exactly the proper path. Besides, it's the only intelligent thing he could have
> > done.
> >
> > >
>  ....
>
> > You really aren't too swift on the uptake are you Jeff? Reread Sheppy's first
> > posting. Having reread it, please try to figure out how dumb your statement
> > above is.
>  ....
>
>
>      Here is the opening of the original posting from Sheppy:
>
> >>
> A2Central.com is pleased to announce that it has been licensed by Apple
> Computer to distribute Apple II system software and select other software.
> <<
>
> It says nothing about "he and A2Central.com".

And where were you when he announced just a few short weeks ago here on csa2 the creation of
A2Central? I suppose you have nothing to do with GSWorld either.

> It states that an entity called
> "A2Central.com" now has a license. We may or may not infer that Sheppy (the individual)
> has been a license holder. Inferring that he has been a license holder merely places his
> confusion about the status of DOS 3.3 in a more positive light.
>
>      Continuing with the licensing announcement:
>
> >>
> Additionally, we have been authorized to rearchive the files in formats
> actually useful to Apple II users.

"we" - I guess you also failed to notice the first person plural. The point of course, is you
missed the point totally, and once it has been pointed out you try the Emperor's clothes
business. Really lame excuses.

>

>
>
> So, effective immediately, A2Central.com members can now download Apple II
> system software, utilities, and HyperCard IIgs in ShrinkIt disk archive
> format at <http://www.a2central.com/stuff/applesoftware>.
> <<
>
> The reference to A2Central.com "members" is odd for a free public on-line 'zine.

Once again you are guilty of making assumptions. A2Central is not a mere `zine like GSWorld.
Keep watching people, and see the good things that are coming to the Apple II world via
A2Central.

> Magazines
> generally have subscribers, not members. Possibly, A2Central.com has been registered as a
> kind of users group. This would automatically convey a license to distribute Apple's II
> series software to members.
>
>  ....
>
> > >      The "don't ask" suggestion is based upon a common sense respect for the
> > > wishes of the rights owner. It is obvious that Apple does not at all mind
> > > having its Apple II system software freely distributed.
> >
> > It's only obvious to someone who would make statements like the one you made above.
> > To not ask but go ahead and distribute something that you don't have permission to
> > distribute, well, only someone with a really warped psyche would see that as
> > showing respect for the copyright holder.
> >
>
>      Numerous on-line archives distribute Apple's Apple II software. They have done so,
> up-front and openly, for years without any complaint or interference from Apple.

And without a license. Perhaps without Apple's knowledge either. That Mac site you referred to
was online for quite some time.

>
>
>      The company's position vis-a-vis its II series software is clear.

The company's position? When did Apple announce the position that you assume it has? Never,
because the position that you assume is one in your own rich fantasy life.

> It views the
> software as having no real commercial value and wishes it to be freely available to users.

Then why didn't they give Sheppy permission to distribute DOS and Pascal?

>
> At the same time, Apple wishes to avoid legally binding agreements which could damage its
> ownership and/or force limitations on distribution.

But it just made a legally binding agreement with Sheppy and A2Central. Which shows clearly
that you haven't the foggiest idea what you are talking about.

>
>
>      Essentially, Apple does not want to be bothered about its II series stuff. Requests
> for "licensing" the software use up Apple personnel resources which could be profitably
> invested somewhere else.

But they did what you just said they won't do. Seems you are wrong - again.

>
>
>      If, with all of this nonsense about licensing zero-value software, you are chiefly
> interested in posturing, fine.

The only posturing is your pretense to know the corporate mind of Apple.

> If, on the other hand, you truly aim to respect Apple's
> wishes, then enjoy your Apple II software, help new users obtain it, and stop pestering
> Apple's reps with goofy questions.

1. I didn't ask Apple any questions.
2. Eric Shepherd/A2Central asked for a license to distribute Apple II system software - and
since Apple agreed, it would seem that what to you is a "goofy question" is serious business
to them.

>
>
>  ....
>
> > > Apple most certainly will act to close down distriutions it
> > > does not like. Apple has not opposed distributions of its
> > > II series system software because the company has everything to gain and
> > > nothing to lose.
> >
> > Snort, chuckle, choke. If they have everything to gain from Apple II distribution,
> > why not Mac OS System 6?
>  ....
>
>      Apple still sells Macs and Mac software.

I own 68040 Macs that can't even use System 7.0. I seriously doubt that System 6 will boot on
an iMac. So how will Apple be hurt by letting people download System 6 for their old Mac
Plus'? By the logic you used above, Apple should be glad to let people download System 6 and
run their own Plus' and then maybe buy an iMac.

Roy