Re: A time for action...

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Arkain writes ...
> 
> Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net> wrote in message
> 397F1AFE.878E1F96@swbell.net">news:397F1AFE.878E1F96@swbell.net...
> > Arkain writes ...
> > >
> > > I want to see a vote by direct response to this
> > > thread from everyone in this group that is interested
> > > in getting rid of the A2 copyright problems that
> > > have split this community. 
 ....

> > What "A2 copyright problems" are you talking about getting rid of?
> 
> Both the one that sparked the Vogon/Turlette
> arguments, and the actual legal
> issue that underlies the whole thing. If we can get rid of the legality
> problem, then there will no longer be a need for the Vogon, Turlette,
> Pirate, and Anti-Pirate classifications.
>

     The legal issue you mention is entirely the creation of those who do not
know the law. As far as legitimate law enforcement authorities are concerned,
there is no legal issue.

     For example, like every other Apple II emulator, the Bernie IIgs
emulator published and sold by F. E. Systems requires copy/transfer of ROM
code copyrighted by Apple.

     For years, vogon types have attacked sites distributing ancient
software. Yet, they never once attacked the Bernie site despite the fact that
it promotes unauthorized distribution of IIgs ROM code and even sends users
to a site _they_ say is a "pirate site" to get the ROM code.

     The vogon troublemakers did not attack the F. E. Systems Bernie emulator
site because one of the primary developers and site managers is Henrik, a
vogon.

     Meanwhile, users saw nothing wrong with promoting transfer/copy of IIgs
ROM code by the Bernie site. (The promotion was public, there was no obvious
reason why Apple should mind, and, in fact, as far as I know, Apple has never
publicly or privately made any request that the unauthorized distribution or
promotion of the distribution cease.)

     So, there was no concern, debate, flak, ... i.e. no "legal issue"
regarding the F. E. Systems web site.


     The point should be clear. There has never been any genuine problem with
legality. Throughout the years spanning these 'legality issue' debates, the
most spectacular aspect of legitimate Law enforcement involvement is its
total absence.

     Whether or not a few confused persons can understand the difference
between a technical property rights violation tolerated by a rights owner and
"breaking the law", Law enforcement authorities can. Whether or not these
persons know the Law, Law enforcement authorities do. Law enforcement
authorities are not concerned because nothing illegal is happening. (Duh!)

     The only "legal problems" are the phony ones created by those who simply
want to close off open, free user access to old Apple II software. Basically,
your concern is not with Legality; it is with Noise from a few troublemakers.


 
> Benefits?
> 
> 1. All Apple 2 paraphernalia becomes public domain
> 2. We(the A2 community) get to move on to better discussions
> 3. We gain complete control of the A2 system and
>    get to do as we please with it.
> 4. No more Vogon based insults from QC
> 5. No more "pule" or blah" from Paul
> 6. A remote but better chance of seeing Dave Empson
>    and others like him come back.
> 7. ...

     Not sure that any of the above relates to a problem worth bothering
with. Any large, open forum will have its periodic debates; and, more often
than not, these will occur during times when relatively few questions are
being posted. If David feels like dropping out for a time, fine. I've done
the same; so have other users.

     As for eliminating even the pretense of a reason for debates over old
software and firmware copyrights, that could be worthwhile. But, then, you
are talking about something like a change in software/firmware copyrights--
e.g. setting the rights period to five years.

     What action are you suggesting it is time for?



Rubywand