Re: Reclassification - Wordperfect

["Quantum_Cat" <anonymous@cotse.com>]

Hiya, Arkain,

 *>Q_C...

 *>Are you purrfect or something? 

Do I have to be to be?

 *>I wonder how many laws you break every day. 

I wonder too.  There are some many on the books.  But I 
assume your point is that if I break a law (say by watering 
my lawn at the wrong time) that I have no right to point 
fingers at Turlettes?

If we take this to extremes, then the police would be 
crippled because they have probably broken laws too.  

 *>I also wonder how many laws you ignore simply for the fact 
that they are no
 *>longer enforced? You probably don't even take into account 
all of the old
 *>Victorian laws that are still on the books, laws that can 
even govern the
 *>activties in your house! 

So how can you equate Victorian laws with the Copyright Act 
which was revised as of the end of the first session of the 
106th Congress in 1999?  Feeble analogy at best, Arkain.

And I doubt very much that the laws you have in mind regard 
property rights.

Lets stick with comparing apples with apples here, OK?

 *>Nobody with any sense is bothering to question the 
legality of copying any
 *>form of commercial software. We all understand that it IS 
illegal for at
 *>least 70 years after the author's death.

And?  You still disregard the fact because it bunches your 
shorts?

 *>"If a tree falls in the woods, and no one's around to hear 
it, does anyone
 *>care?"

What's caring have to do with it, Arkain?  Pointless proverbs 
don't help your argument.

 *>Laws are constantly being broken on this issue. Everybody 
here knows that.

But you object to me waving a flag and pointing out the worst 
of the perps?  Get over it.  ;)

 *>Have any of the so-called vogons informed the original 
author(s) & copyright
 *>holder(s) that their rights are being violated? If so, did 
they care? 

Yes, some have.  And in many cases they did, but weren't 
willing to spend the money on lawyers to correct the 
situation.

My service is free.  ;)

 *>I would wager that they either didn't care or haven't been 
informed. Since
 *>these packages no longer have a commercial value to the 
copyright holder(s),
 *>can they even expect legal remuneration for the 
infractions? I don't think
 *>so, at least not from what I read in the Copyright Act & 
DCMA. Before you

That would be the Civil portion.  There still remains the 
Criminal aspect of the Act.

 *>can sue for damages, you have to prove that you were 
damaged. Since the
 *>software is no longer in production, being sold, or 
supported, it no longer
 *>has a monetary value to its copyright holder(s). It 
becomes a "no harm, no
 *>foul" type situation.

"No Harm, No foul" is not a legal term.  Perhaps you invented 
it?  I certainly know of no court cases where that's been 
used.  If folks sue for hurt feelings, it wouldn't be too 
hard to include mental anguish at seeing the theft of your 
property in a suit.

 *>As far as C. Turley is concerned, who cares if he is doing 
it in the wrong
 *>order(posting the software before he has permission). 

Well, obviously _I_ care.  When it does it as standard 
procedure, then that simply enforces the fact that he's a 
thief, and a liar.  Nobody has to "care" for that fact to 
ring true.

 *>The fact is that he *IS* doing *SOMETHING* to help the 
situation. There's an
 *>old saying that goes:

Ah... You must be using an entirely different meaning of the 
word "help" than the rest of the world.

Stealing is generally not regarded as "help", unless used in 
the manner "He helped himself to my stuff".

I guess this says something about you, Arkain.

 *>    "Before you try to get the twig out of my eye,
 *>     you'd better get the log out of your own."

Bullshit.  ;)

 *>Turley may be doing things the wrong way, or in the wrong 
order. He may not
 *>even have accomplished that much when compared to some of 
the others.
 *>Despite all of that, he is still trying to do something 
about the problem.

The problem is the theft of property that doesn't belong to 
him and his public distribution of the same.  Perhaps you 
hadn't noticed.

What problem are YOU concerned about that he's doing such a 
fine job of doing something about?

 *>Is that more than can be said for you? Have you worked on 
getting some
 *>software reclassified yourself? Have you succeeded at any 
of it?

Rhetorical question?  Do I have to jump through your little 
flaming hoops (being perfect, doing something constructive) 
to merit posting my opinions?  To answer your questions the, 
Yes and Yes.

 *>I've said all of that to say this. The insults you make 
are pointless and
 *>only serve to weaken if not destroy any valid points that 
you may have about
 *>someone else's actions. If you choose to respond to this 
or any other post,
 *>please keep your comments civil and insult free. As for 
diminishing the

I'm trying.  I think my points stand up very well.  At least, 
in the past, there was a lot of squawking from those who 
found them imbedded in their butts.

 *>accomplishments of those in the camp opposite yours 
(Turley and others), I
 *>don't see where you have the right to do that if you 
haven't done at least

Most of the Dorktors accomplishments appear to be collecting 
stolen goods, ripping articles from other folks web pages, 
conning morons into running his ftp pirate sites, and in 
general, being a pimp for many Apple II users.

 *>as much yourself. If your accomplishments in this 
area(assuming they exist)
 *>aren't as great, then you need to work on building your's 
up before you can
 *>look down on someone else's.

I assure you, my accomplishments won't be as low as Turley's.  
I won't be making my corner of csa2 into a nice comfy 
crackhouse.  Disappointed?

 *>I am a firm believer in following the laws, but I will 
ignore them when they
 *>are inappropriate. 

That's anarchy, Arkain.  Remind me not to call you as a 
babysitter.  ;)

If you are free to ignore laws, why are you so upset with the 
fact that I ignore you and your rationalization of why it's 
"OK to steal"?

 *>On this, don't try to classify me as a Turlette or a 
Vogon. Those
 *>definitions won't fit me. You might be able to get away 
with pirate, but I
 *>do believe that the laws are justified surrounding 
software that is *still
 *>sold &/or supported*. So I'm not really a pirate either. 
So save both of us
 *>the trouble and don't classify me.

Alas, the Copyright Act says nothing about "*still sold &/or 
supported*".  Perhaps it should, but it protects EVERYTHING.  
So yes, your really ARE a pirate.  Tough Beans.

In any case, Copyrights of digital materials (music/programs/
graphics) are likely to be high on the legislative agenda in 
the near future.  Perhaps it will work out to satisfy us all.

 *>Arkain

Vogons For a Turlette Free Apple II Community!

Quantum_Cat