Workbench Disk Sets... What Would Be The Best Way To Obtain Them...

[AmigaHeretic]

Hopefully this can be a sensible discussion on peoples ideas & thoughts on how to make it simple and easy for folk to get hold of Workbench Disk Sets either free or paid for without us all fighting with each other about the legalities of copyright etc... and descending in silly name calling and all that malarky...

There was a post to Petro Tyschtschenko's facebook.  http://de-de.facebook.com/people/Petro-T-Tyschtschenko/1365691299

I have messaged him a few times and he has stated 3.1 and prior was released back around '96 for "free distribution".  He said it was known back then that the OS was released on cover disks and made available for anyone and everyone.  I have asked if either he would himself or at least allow for permission to put the disks on Aminet. I guess we will see.

I asked if he had any documents as well.  I mentioned the readme on the cover disks which predates Amiga Inc. and Cloanto.  (I didn't mention AI or Cloanto), and if there was any similar documentation from back then.  

Seems pretty clear the the OS was available for free distro before AI came along. Hell, I even have the CD with the complete Workbench 3.0 disk set on it and the readme myself from Petro saying it's been released free.  This is ridiculous!

[AmigaHeretic]

Who owns the C64 rom rights?  Why are those included in every emulator?

[AmigaHeretic]

I know "illegal" sounds very cool and dramatic, but it's simply not the proper term. But why care about facts or reality if all that seems to matter is generating attention by spamming this board with useless drivel?

What would you call it then?  

You take an AF CD and make Workbench floppies from it, no legal right.

You take ADF from Internet and make Workbench floppies from it, no legal right.

That is what everyone keeps saying.  How are the two different?  Are they both illegal or not illegal?

[AmigaHeretic]

santa owns 1/2 the rights and the other 1/2 is split among the seveb dwarfs.

I'm serious.  C64 emulators include the C64 rom and OS and no one cares. Why?  That even includes MS software in it.  Pretty soon I'm sure Dammy will be spamming the boards with his pirate CommodoreOS C64 ROMs then.  

If someone includes links to C64 emulators are they going to get reported as a pirate?

[AmigaHeretic]

Or you could use buy Amiga Forever 2011 and not share. If users want more features added like other versions of Workbench disks then ask for them. Software developers love to keep developing and upgrading great Virtual Machine software.

http://www.amigaforever.com/kb/13-145

Using Amiga Forever as a source for disks for real Amiga hardware is illegal and likely to get Cloanto into trouble. It may not be wise for Cloanto's sake for you to keep suggesting this illegal behavior.

This thread is about Workbench disks for real hardware.  Amiga Forever is not an option.  See the link above.

[AmigaHeretic]

Maybe your right, Cloanto should chime in on this one and give some clarity.

That's what Franko has had on his site.  No ROM images at all which is essential to run an emulator, and would hurt Cloanto, but Franko has no ROM images.

He simply has the Workbench images and install disks etc, for people that need replacements for disks that have died.  With just these disks and no ROMS you can't actually emulate anything anyway.

These disks are of no use by themselves unless you have an Amiga anyway.  (or unless you pirate a ROM in which case you will pirate the disks somewhere else anyway, but that is another story)

Anyway that is all that is going on here.

[AmigaHeretic]

So now it's a case of waiting to see if Cloanto can produce legal proof to back up their complaint...

I don't really see what Cloanto has to do with this.  I was under the impression they had a license to distribute the ROMs from someone other entity.  Are they trying to stop you on someone else's behalf?

So what if they have a something showing they can distribute ADFs?  OK.  Yeah.  What has that got to with anyone else?  Maybe a 1,000,000 other people have a license to distribute ADFs as well.

http://www.microsoft.com/oem/en/licensing/sblicensing/Pages/index.aspx

Look I am a registered OEM, with MS.  Anyone can register.  I can sell systems and distribute Windows as part of my computer packages.  Like Cloanto includes ADFs as part of their emulation packages.

Can I go into BestBuy and tell them to stop selling Windows because I have an agreement with MS to distribute Windows?  Can I sue other people that are selling Windows because I have an agreement with MS to distribute Windows?  


Is Workbench now owned by Cloanto or something?  I guess maybe that is what the documents will show if they provide anything at all.  Very strange Cloanto.

[AmigaHeretic]

http://sites.google.com/site/freeamiga/

1997-1998: Patents and Trademarks, But No Copyrights?

On April 20, 1995, after a number of iterations, and bidding in agreement and with the backing of some Asian companies, ESCOM AG acquired certain assets from the liquidation of the Commodore-Amiga companies. These same Asian companies in return received from ESCOM certain rights (including that to publish the Amiga operating system) over certain Asian territories [7].

In 1997, intersecting Gateway's acquisition of certain Amiga-related assets from ESCOM, a German appeals court (Oberlandesgericht Celle, judgment 13 U 97/97), after a review that included the contracts between the "Commodore-Amiga Group" and ESCOM AG, and while recognizing that for example patents were transferred between Commodore-Amiga and ESCOM, also concluded [72][73][14] that there was no indication that any copyrights for the Amiga operating system itself had been transferred to ESCOM.


In 1998, possibly in an attempt to "repair" the situation that had been exposed by the 1997 Celle judgment, ESCOM's trustee Mr. Bernhard Hembach signed three "$1" contracts [205][206][207] that first assigned the copyrights of the late Commodore Business Machines, Inc. (Delaware) and Commodore-Amiga, Inc. (California) to ESCOM, and then transferred the same again to Gateway's Amiga company. On November 3, 1998, the three contracts were signed by Mr. Bernhard Hembach on behalf of all parties, after which they were filed at the US Copyright Office [203].

According to these documents, with three signatures by one and the same person (a recurring pattern in "Amiga" matters), and for the total amount of three US dollars, the copyrights over the Amiga OS (and some other publications) changed hands twice on the same day.

The German notary public who notarized the procedure also noted in the documents that he recognized the authority of Mr. Bernhard Hembach to enter into the Copyright assignment agreements on behalf of the (defunct) two Commodore companies on the basis of the 1995 "Trademark Assignment" agreement [199] between the Commodore companies and ESCOM. This would seem to reinforce the Celle judgment, as it confirms that in spite of another year having passed by, both ESCOM and Gateway still had nothing more in their hands than references to patents and trademarks (but not to copyrights).

The statement by the notary public exposed a potentially troubling detail: how could a trademark assignment contract be used to assign the copyrights?

Did the German notary public understand the difference between a trademark and a copyright?

Did the US Copyright Office understand what the German notary public had written?

Did the US law firm who made new assignment filings in 2007 [203] understand the German documents it was relying on?

Would a transfer out of two already-defunct companies [204][208] have been permissible in the first place?

One of the contracts [206] even referenced and incorrect company, mentioning a Delaware entity instead of the California [204] copyright owner.

[AmigaHeretic]

There isn't much to know about copyright. If you don't have a license then you can't distribute a copyright work. Just because you can't find someone to give you a license is no excuse.
 

How does Cloanto know Franko doesn't have a license to distribute them?  Did they ask?  Or just complain?

Does CLoanto "own" the Copyright so do they even "have" the right to complain?

Flip side:
How do we know Cloanto have a license?  

We don't own the copyright, so do we have a right to complain to Cloanto's ISP because we suspect they do not have a license to distribute and demand proof they do?  


Second of all regarding Franko and a license for distributing copyright, I think you are missing the point.  I think basically Franko is distributing these Workbench disks under "Public Domain".  


Who's burden is it prove these are public domain?  
Franko's that they are, or Cloanto's that that just have a license to distribute, or the "Unknown" copyright holder that they are still copyrighted?


I think the problem is here, it's possible Cloanto has a license to distribute Kickstart images and disks, but at the same time the license is either made by ill-intentioned crooks from AI that know they don't hold the copyright or just ignorant of the fact that the disks went into the public domain 15+ years ago.



Either way, worst case scenario, if the Workbench is still copyrighted, I fail to see how a third party that just a has a license to sell a product can act on a copyright holders behalf.

[AmigaHeretic]

While examples, lets go thru them in the context.

Problem is we don't know WHO the copyright holder is.  Original Commodore?  They don't care if we distribute disks.  So problem for Franko there?

Petro Era Amiga?  He gave Workbench away anyway!  Written documented proof.  It's PD anway!  No problem there.


So who is the Copyright holder or is there one?  Where these given to Public Domain as some suspect by Petro?  Is Copyright still with original dead Commodore so, basically free to distribute anyway.


I feel bad for Cloanto that they probably got tricked by AI (like so many others) into thinking they "bought" a legit license or something, but we all know deep down that Amiga Inc., probably has NO claim to Kickstarts and Workbench.  


I REMIND PEOPLE again.  CLOANTO even if it is VALID, Cloanto's license is for EMULATION ONLY.  Cloanto on their website states it is ILLEGAL to use those images on REAL HARDWARE.  

So again I don't really see why Cloanto even give two shits about this anyway.  This is legit hardware users just want 1 Fracking resouce to source all their old disks as the floppies go tits up.  Who the FRACK reall cares for F sake?

My GOD!

[AmigaHeretic]

Franko's, of course.

I guess that's why we have lawyers.

If workbench or kickstart would be in public domain it would need to be clearly stated as such by the copyright holder. Since this is not the case they are not.

Well, it's been pointed out and linked to that Petro gave all 3.0 disks to PD basically (ask the lawyers not me for clarification) the readme and docs have been posted a dozen times already.  There are other arguments for the rest.

[AmigaHeretic]

registered the Trademark "WORKBENCH" on the 19th of April 2011...

Cloanto Register the Trademark Workbench on 19th April 2011...

Go here to the United States Patent and Trademark Office

http://tess2.uspto.gov/

And they are going after you?

I wonder who they will see first?  Hmm.. how many companies use the term "Workbench" as it relates to computers???


Well there's:

-Hyperion!  Watch  out guys!

-mysql  has Workbench 5.2.33 (latest version)

-Amiga Inc. has Workbench 5 (yet to be release though) :roflmao:

-Workbench Software http://www.workbenchsoftware.com/  Hell better go after these guys for sure!

- Workbench Soft   And these guys!  http://www.workbenchsoft.com/   How dare these guys infringe your copyright 10 years before you think to register it!

Doesn't Maya call there UI Workbench?  Haven't used it in a while?  I'm sure there are a dozen others.  
:laughing:

[AmigaHeretic]

Don't use the term "illegal" in this context. It's bogus.

What would you call it then?  I am of course referring to this? http://www.amigaforever.com/kb/13-145

[AmigaHeretic]

Ah yes, forgot all about this excellent FAQ cloanto has set up. See this:

Distribution of Amiga ROM and OS Files

And while we're at it, I think this confirms that Cloanto indeed has a license:

Source: https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0BxlY9g_OfLqDZTQyNGFkYzEtZDI5Zi00YzcxLThhODYtODcyZTg0M2I4MzQ1

First off that is no legal proof what so ever.  It's something some one typed up as an example listing.  That is not a Cloanto contract or anything.  So don't try to confuse people by posting some snippet of something.  That has no legal anything. I could type something showing "AmigaHeretic has the right to distribute since 1993" and it has the same 100% legal weight as what you show there.

Again, if anything it just again shows, that Cloanto supposedly has a license to distribute stuff ONLY for emulation since 1994.  Ok, great.  

First, how does that have anything to do with physical disks?

Second, if stuff was given to PD, ie, Petro gives Workbench 3.0 to PD in 1995, then so what if Cloanto has a agreement a year prior to distribute disks?  They can still distribute them fine.  We can still get 3.0 free per Petro.  Where is the conflict?

[AmigaHeretic]

Nobody seems to disagree with this, not even Cloanto. Maybe someone should contact them and ask if such a service (using real floppy disks!) can be set up?

There's the problem.  The smart thing to do, and I'm sure Cloanto would love to would be to put the ADF's up for like 50 cents a disk DL.  Pick any disk pay $0.50.  Get a whole OS for like $2.50.  Everyone is happy!!  Wouldn't have to even deal with Franko and his ISP.

Why don't Cloanto do this?

Dum Duh Dummm!!!!

Because there is no COPYRIGHT holder!!  Cloanto have no license to do this type of service AND they have no way to get a new license to do this because no one exists any longer that can give new licenses.


My guess is a last ditch effort to keep this a secret?  That is the only thing I can think of.