Re: Weasel

[Eric Rucker <bhtooefr@gmail.com>]

On Jun 5, 2:12 pm, "Michael J. Mahon" <mjma...@aol.com> wrote:
> tom wrote:
> > On Jun 4, 1:32 am, PZ <skierp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Its not like he dug a defunct site out of the depths of the Wayback
> >> Machine Internet Archive, and casually omitted the copyright notice.
> >> This is a blatant act of swiping an actively maintained site, the
> >> intent became clear once he put his name in place of yours. I agree
> >> with the above posters, go after the host first, that should be the
> >> easiest to access, then pursue more drastic measures, if that doesn't
> >> work.  I don't think its selfish at all to want to protect something
> >> that you care about.  This was and still is your baby.
>
> >> - Paul
>
> > I agree.
>
> > This experience echoes that of me and some other faq maintainers from
> > way back (I used to maintain different ones, among them the
> > comp.emulator.apple2 faq).  In violation of the copyright notices,
> > some company just scooped up all the faqs and started selling them on
> > cd.  A bunch of the faq volunteers quit, since it was so easy for
> > their work to be taken.)
>
> > Abraham Lincoln made a reference to people "wringing their bread from
> > the sweat of other men's faces" in his second inauguration -- that
> > seems to apply here.  You put up the content, you did the work, they
> > swiped it, put their name on it, and seek to profit by it.  Those who
> > suggest this might be a good thing are ignoring the fact that this is
> > wrong wrong wrong and illegal.  No way should someone be encouraged to
> > profit from this kind of theft.
>
> > You also note that the straightforward legal procedures would involve
> > expensive lawsuits, a step you haven't taken yet.  I would proceed
> > with the actions with the isp host, and I think you can count of
> > support from some members of this forum.
>
> Yes, your feelings and perceptions of injustice are quite reasonable.
>
> But it's worth stopping to consider the reason for doing the work in
> the first place.
>
> If you did the work for your own benefit (money, power, glory), then
> you have reason to feel thwarted by someone distributing your work
> (particularly without attribution).
>
> But if you did the work as a service to the community, then wider
> distribution actually furthers your goals, regardless of the means.
>
> I remember going through a very similar thought process many years
> ago when I was trying to decide whether to release a program as
> shareware or freeware.  I decided that my intent was never to make
> anything from my efforts, so I released it as freeware.
>
> Of course, there is a benefit in maintaining some kind of "version
> control" over anything released, to preserve some consistency.  This
> is sacrificed when copies are made, but that kind of physical diversity
> is *exactly* what makes the information more durable in the real world.
>
> -michael
>
> ******** Note new website URL ********
>
> NadaNet and AppleCrate II for Apple II parallel computing!
> Home page:  http://home.comcast.net/~mjmahon/
>
> "The wastebasket is our most important design
> tool--and it's seriously underused."

Hey guys, take a look at what I came up with.

http://bhtooefr.ath.cx/files/applecrate.htm

Now how does it feel?