Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: FarQuad on July 18, 2003, 09:27:50 PM
-
Here's a question for you.
Yesterday I was reading John's Suite 101 review of the AmigaOne XE (http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/1365/102000) when something caught my eye..
From John's article:
Eyetech supply the latest PowerPC build of UAE along with a licensed 3.1 ROM, AmigaOS 3.1 and a selection of pre-installed software including Scala, Wordworth and Photogenics taken from the old A1200 Magic Packs.
Here's where the problem comes in. Neither Eyetech, Hyperion, nor Amiga Inc themselves are licensed to distribute the Magic Pack Software (and I am sure they are not licensed to distribute Scala, Wordworth, or Photogenics) from the Amiga 1200 Magic Pack.
I have always been under the impression that the Amiga 1200 Magic pack license (according to various sources) was software licensed for distribution with the SPECIFIC AMIGA 1200 packs themselves.
Maybe someone should contact Scala, Paul Nolan (Photogenics) and the Wordworth people about the fact that their software is being distributed without their knowledge? I'm sure they'd welcome a new license, or the money from the distribution.
// FarQ
-
FarQuad wrote:
Maybe someone should contact Scala, Paul Nolan (Photogenics) and the Wordworth people about the fact that .........
// FarQ
More controversy :roll:
-
Actually, I think Eyetech have got a shedload of Amiga Magic software bundles - I just bought a brand new Amiga 1200 from them and that came with a complete Amiga Magic bundle - software on HD and floppies plus manuals.
I doubt they'd bundle the floppies with an A1 'cause you can't use them anyway but I'd be surprised if you didn't get the manuals.
-
Actually, I think Eyetech have got a shedload of Amiga Magic software bundles -
Aegis,
If FarQuad is correct, and I believe he is, it doesn't matter.
While they can sell the Magic Pack 1200's, Eyetech would have no transferred license to distribute the software that was intended for the Amiga 1200 Magic Pack with a new platform.
-
im pretty sure they got a license to do so...
-
@Tomas,
I don't know if they do or not, but my FIRM bet is against that they don't. I've sent e-mails to Scala and Paul Nolan asking for verification.
Wayne
-
How do you know that Eyetech and the others don't have a license?
-
nm this, wayne allready responded
-
Actually you can even buy it seperately :
HERE (http://www.eyetech.co.uk/search.php?SearchStr=&SearchCat=AMAS)at their site, so it's probalby no big deal.
The software is very outdated anyway.
-
It is also possible to get the Magic pack @ Versalia (http://www.vesalia.de/?V02b0f15535f4314725c5e57520c514e01101f0954414752050140090a1e31115579633a223c6373744e03263f2a2a766105396e6f612778292077055d703f3b6b0b52590c4305376655434846084b5e5f1c3a7a5d125)
-
But they aren't selling the Magic Pack (which came on floppies). They are distributing the software on a CD, which means that they have reconfigured it and are distributing it as part of the AmigaOne package, NOT as a Magic Pack. Not sure they have a legal right to do that.
Wayne, please let us know what you find out.
-
Not sure they have a legal right to do that.
How can you just assume they didnt? If some other company did something similar, you wouldnt just assume they do not have the right to do so..
Seems like some people here in the forum is just trying to dig up as much dirt they can about AmigaINC and its partners... Trying their hardest to find a way to hurt them..
What a community...
Though you dont like AmigaINC or AmigaONE, you dont have to start all this EVIL rumours without any info at all....
-
Hmm I hope you people are not doing this just to screw Eytech?! I mean have you looked at the version numbers of the software?!!! Who buys it anyway. There are probably various licenses of much more UP TO DATE Amiga software that is to use only with the AmigaOS, and they are referenced as compatible on some MOS sites. Are they promotiing unlicensed used of the software? Well I haven't seen people trying to screw them for that. I really don't care, it's just that this game people is playing is getting TOO annoying.
Who cares if AInc. is almost bankrupt and can't pay their employes, or has issues with some of them?
So much claims and the so much called proves for "the truth " still haven't come out.
Like someone said. Why can't we all get along, and leave this stupid game, it was fun but you're taking it too seriously.
-
@Tomas,
While there's a certain true aspect to what you're saying (which is why I am trying to verify with the software authors), are you suggesting that anti-piracy laws and business morality should NOT apply to Amiga Inc and partners?
-
are you suggesting that laws and morality should NOT apply to Amiga Inc and partners?
no no, that is not what i am saying. What i am saying is that this is now only a rumour... Why would eyetech do such a thing? Sure, if it turns out to be true... then i agree, this is wrong. But as it seems now, it seems to be just a rumour put out just to hurt Amiga and its partners.
If some other copany bundled for example this products with their hardware, i doubt anyone would have doubted that this company had the rights to do so.
I guess we will see soon, when you have get reply.
I personally think they have their licenses in order.
-
FarQuad wrote:
Maybe someone should contact Scala, Paul Nolan (Photogenics) and the Wordworth people about the fact that their software is being distributed without their knowledge? I'm sure they'd welcome a new license, or the money from the distribution.
Maybe someone should mind his own ####ing (edited by admin) business, instead of sticking his nose into stuff he doesn't know anything about. Stop spreading FUD.
Eyetech are professionel people and I have no doubt that everything is as it should be.
-
It's just a vague guess, but checking this page (http://www.eyetech.co.uk/NEWS/AMIGA009.HTM) a possible explanation came to my mind. The original AmigaONE was an A1200+AmigaONE mobo fitted together, so the Magic Pack was intended for the A1200.
Now, there is 2 possible scenario: A., in the long time passed by they have obtained a new license, B., in the long time, pressure they had endured, they've just forgot it. When the AmigaONE project started all licences were all right.
I don't see intentional wrongdoing even in the latter case.
-
@Snuden
I think you should stop whining, and pay attention. The question was brought up, and now Wayne is just following up on it. It is a very valid question. If you don't think it is of public intrest, then follow the series of POSSIBLE events that I will lay out for you.
1. Eyetech gives away the Magic Pack with A1.
2. Paul Nolon, 21'st Century entertainmenet, ect don't care.
3. Suddenly, Unisys gets word that AmigaONE is shipping with unpaid gif loaders/savers.
4. They contact cloanto and/or paul nolan, and suddenly Eyetech is sued out of existance.
Gee. That would really suck. All because of a GIF loader/saver.
And before you think I'm wierd, let me say this. Paul Nolan, Cloanto, etc, likely don't care that their ANCIENT software is getting shoved into this deal (likely, not 100%), but I promise you Unisys is quite dangerous about .gif!!!
-
Targhan wrote:
@Snuden
I think you should stop whining, and pay attention. The question was brought up, and now Wayne is just following up on it. It is a very valid question. If you don't think it is of public intrest, then follow the series of POSSIBLE events that I will lay out for you.
1. Eyetech gives away the Magic Pack with A1.
2. Paul Nolon, 21'st Century entertainmenet, ect don't care.
3. Suddenly, Unisys gets word that AmigaONE is shipping with unpaid gif loaders/savers.
4. They contact cloanto and/or paul nolan, and suddenly Eyetech is sued out of existance.
Gee. That would really suck. All because of a GIF loader/saver.
And before you think I'm wierd, let me say this. Paul Nolan, Cloanto, etc, likely don't care that their ANCIENT software is getting shoved into this deal (likely, not 100%), but I promise you Unisys is quite dangerous about .gif!!!
The Unisys patent on GIF has run out as far as I am aware.
-
I just cant see why you people just start speculating about this... for all you know, eyetech have all the licenses in order...
If it was pegasos that was bundled with this software, im sure there would be no buzz about this... But just cause its eyetech, they gotta be criminals? I bet if this was infact pegasos and someone would bring this question up, you guys would protect them..
-
I don't see intentional wrongdoing even in the latter case.
I don't either. I don't think, or at least I hope, no one is implying blatant piracy. It may very well be fine and dandy. OTOH if it turns out they were only licensed for the A1200 because of a special bundle deal AND the original author responds that he does not want it distributed any other way, then Eyetech would have to respond.
-
@mdma
The Unisys patent on GIF has run out as far as I am aware.
That is good news, but Cloanto recently uploaded the latest version of PPaint to Aminet. Again, they did so without the GIF loader/saver. Also, remember the Unisys patent isn't technically called GIF. It is the LZW (LZH?) archivial routines within the loader/saver for gif images.
In my honest opinion, I *really* hope they have a licence for this, because I would LOVE to purchase a MagicPack on a CD with the documents in PDF format! Oh yeah! Much easier than all the hoops I would have to jump through to get it onto any of my systems now. (My 1200's drive is wierd, Amithlon has a PC floppy drive, same on my Pegasos, etc)
-
I bet if this was infact pegasos and someone would bring this question up, you guys would protect them..
Thomas, please do not go this route. There is no need to make this a blue vs red fight.
-
Actually I asked Eyetech back in March I believe why they included only 3.1 and not 3.5 or 3.9 with the Amigaone bundle and the answer was "We don't have the license to include those.
Hmm a Wayne shouldn't you have asked Eyetech too?
Farquad serious alligations but purely speculative You make statements as if fact. When all you have is wishful thinking.
-
Hmm a Wayne shouldn't you have asked Eyetech too?
Already did.
-
Microsoft has been known to sue people over doing things like that, selling software under new terms that was covered under a specific license. Most OEM deals (which is what the MagicPack was) forbid selling outside of the original license, you'd have a better chance passing Jeff Minter through the eye of a needle ;)
Damien
-
Guys?
Don't get me in the middle of this. FarQuad (not me, so stop whining at me in PM) made a valid observation, and raised a legitimate question.. I am asking the software authors about the status of their licenses for the Magic Pack software which is being distributed on the AmigaOne (a wholly different machine than originally licensed for). I have not asked Eyetech, because like other things, I believe Eyetech is innocent here and they've been sold a bill of goods. Remember, the license for the Magic Pack was with COMMODORE* (and perhaps AT), not Amiga Inc. Amiga Inc licensed the trademarks, they do not automatically inherit licenses between third party software makers.
Until that point, I am just waiting on their responses. There is absolutely no reason for this to become yet another red versus blue troll fight. Software piracy is illegal, no matter who is doing it.
(* = see clarification below - edited)
-
it was fun but you're taking it too seriously.
You might consider that for the people who slaved away writing the software that was included in the bundle, for many it was business, and in business you follow certain rules or you get sued. This isn't the playground where you just run off and sulk (or break their nose, which ever you prefer) if someone breaks the rules, if a person, business or other legal entity breaks the law then you are entitled to recrimination.
Damien
-
@Wayne
The licence was with Amiga Technologies GMbH, i.e. Escom. I have the "user end" licence right here.
-
@Targhan,
Thank you for the clarification... I stand corrected on the originators of the Magic Pack. I was, in fact, working to verify that when you responded.
Wayne
-
I know about 10 people that has AmigaOne fairly close to me, and no one has gotten this MagicPack along with their A1. These people span over the entire Scandinavia...
Perhaps this was a giveaway for this reporter only, or could you interpret his review as it was actually his own MagicPack (I haven't read the report yet)?
-
What a load of old trollup you would probably find that all the ppl purchasing the A1 had previously purchased the A1200 magic pack so are realy only getting a second copy of the software anyway
-
>>>>
The Unisys patent on GIF has run out as far as I am aware.
>>>>
Only in the US it has about 10 more months in most other countries.
-Tig
-
The patent on LZW compression via unisys expired on June 20, 2003
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3028
-
"ou might consider that for the people who slaved away writing the software that was included in the bundle, for many it was business, and in business you follow certain rules or you get sued. This isn't the playground where you just run off and sulk (or break their nose, which ever you prefer) if someone breaks the rules, if a person, business or other legal entity breaks the law then you are entitled to recrimination."
I agree but that wasn't what I was tring to tell. My point was that this seems (hopefully not) as being used to atack Eyetech. It 's a rumour, and rumous have their effects, wheter true or not.
There seem to be (from other posts) other stores selling the magic pack, seperately, but the title of the thread is " Eyetech pirating software"....
-
but the title of the thread is " Eyetech pirating software"....
The title of the thread is " Eyetech pirating software?"
There is a MAJOR difference in those two phrases.
One is a statement fact, the title of the thread is a question.
Won't the people who wrote the software already have been paid for the OEM bundles anyway?
The way I see it, is it's just the same as me putting my BatPack software onto a CD, and then selling the CD along with the original disks and manuals. For arguments sake lets say Eyetech have 2000 Magic Packs that they have paid for. If they only sell 2000 of these CD's and never sell anymore of them, then they have done nothing wrong. If however, they sell more than 2000, then that's a different story.
-
I think you should stop whining, and pay attention.
I'm not whining. I'm just tired of all these people spreading nothing but unsubstantiated rumors and FUD. Which this is as we don't know anything about whether or not these people have a deal with Eyetech.
And before you think I'm wierd, let me say this. Paul Nolan, Cloanto, etc, likely don't care that their ANCIENT software is getting shoved into this deal (likely, not 100%), but I promise you Unisys is quite dangerous about .gif!!!
LOL. The gif/lzw patent isn't valid anymore. Perhaps you should pay more attention.
-
I hardly think it matters since the respective programe authers have all ready been paid. Theres only so many licence numbers for the magic packs so once all the licence cards have been sent out the original floppy media becomes redundent anyway.
now if the licence cards were being photocopied and issued out with the software bundles, then things would be different but somehow i cant see em doing that .
-
Uae is setup by eyetech i have not installed it on my a1, so i dont know what is on the cd setup.i do have a boxed a1200 magic pack but i would not use the old software that was with it .I have photogenics 5 so 1.2 does not interest me. i know the documentation with the a1 says the roms are licensed but i m not sure about any other software.?
-
Don't get me in the middle of this. FarQuad (not me, so stop whining at me in PM) made a valid observation, and raised a legitimate question.. I am asking the software authors about the status of their licenses for the Magic Pack software which is being distributed on the AmigaOne (a wholly different machine than originally licensed for)
While I understand what you are saying Wayne, and I agree to an extent. This is no way to handle the question at hand. Farquad should have addressed the issue directly with Eyetech and/or the software authors. Other wise, it looks like he is on a witch hunt and out to give an additional black eye to the Amiga/Hyperion/Eyetech team. And the title of this thread should be changed to not indicate a negative bias toward Eyetech (he could have easily called it "What are the licensing terms of the Magic Pack?". You know full well how this will get twisted and stick into peoples minds against Eyetech.
-
"The title of the thread is " Eyetech pirating software?"
There is a MAJOR difference in those two phrases."
Ok, my mistake.
-
This thread is such a load of bulls##t, you'd almost think it was the work of The FUD Master himself. ;-)
-
To be fair you'll have to post a thread "Eyetech Not pirating software ?" in the end :-D
-
Blom:
your avatar is even more disturbing now, didnt think that be possible :-)
@topic
next please.
-
Snuden wrote:
LOL. The gif/lzw patent isn't valid anymore. Perhaps you should pay more attention.
LOL..maybe you should pay more attention...;-)
Their patent for the US and several other countries expired this year, but it`s still valid in the UK and a few other European countries..
Found this on /.
"The U.S. LZW patent expires June 20, 2003, the counterpart Canadian patent expires July 7, 2004, the counterpart patents in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy expire June 18, 2004, and the Japanese counterpart patents expire June 20, 2004. "
-
Jose wrote:
Who buys it anyway.
They are old but still copyrighted !
There are probably various licenses of much more UP TO DATE Amiga software that is to use only with the AmigaOS, and they are referenced as compatible on some MOS sites. Are they promotiing unlicensed used of the software?
Because that would be just breaking an EULA, which in most countries would be ruled invalid
if they ever got to a court.
Dealers handing out "free" SW isn't something new in this market, and IF Eyetech don't include
manuals, you can bet on it that those packs aren't just old stock. Wether they obtained new
licences is something that Wayne tries to
investigate. Vesalia selling "unbundled" Magig-Packs is again just breaking the EULA.
-
Who cares?! :-o This software is outdated, it a stupid thing. And is alsoa a stupid thing try to sell in for A1.
Eyetech is doing a great work for a1, this is the important thing.
-
@Wayne:
I have not asked Eyetech, because like other things, I believe Eyetech is innocent here and they've been sold a bill of goods.
Boy, that level of blind hatred is unbelievable. Here's some shoking news:
Dealers have been selling the Magic Pack seperately way before Amiga Inc. even existed. I just checked some old magazine adverts: You're not just threatening Eyetech (who sold IDE-HDs with the Magic Pack software pre-installed in early 1997) and Vesalia, but probably 80% of the existing dealers. Congratulations! If you need any assistance, let me know - I'll happily scann the adverts. Who needs dealers anyway?
I was hoping that you might have become somewhat more careful after your recent "AmigaOne SDA" debacle - well, I guess this thread proves the opposite.
With zero knowledge about the product ("Commodore"? *sigh*) or the actual license, you come to the conclusion that "Amiga Inc. and partners are pirating software"? That's a new low.
you'd almost think it was the work of The FUD Master himself.
Are you speaking specifically of Mike Bouma, or of Samface?
Best of Wayne Hunt, July 2003:
"The stupid AmigaOne SDA prevents me from using the system for my purposes"
"Only the blind zealeots will not see that there will be no AmigaOS4 if Amiga Inc. go bankrupt"
"Look, Ray has installed a picture database - what a progress"
"I don't know if Eyetech have a license to distribute the Magic pack seperately, but my FIRM bet is against that they don't."
-
you'd almost think it was the work of The FUD Master himself.
Are you speaking specifically of Mike Bouma, or of Samface?
No. (http://www.west-point.org/society/wps-paris/20March2003_08.html)
Who said that, btw? I can't find the post that was quoted from :-?
-
i never got this magicpack for a1 , i have it for my a1200, and some more bundles..
anyway my guess is, eyetech bought a certain number of liscenses, and they never sold out so
it was a give away for later purposes..
like when i go to a shop and buy a dvd player, i got 5 brand new dvd movies with it. included in the price..
anyway i hope this fud will be cleaned up...
-
@Blomberg:
Who said that, btw? I can't find the post that was quoted from
Wayne. He just removed his posting (along with mine, which I reposted a few minutes ago) later on.
-
Since no one here seems to actually have the AOne with UAE installed, I thought I might enligthen those who are interested.
The progs that are preinstalled (no actual Magic Pack included the progs are just installed):
Photogenics-SE 1.2
Wordworth 4SE
Datastore
Organiser
Turbocalc
PPaintSE
Pinball Mania
and Scala MM300
The progs are from 94-95 and all that can be are registered to Eyetech, "customer". PPaint includes a doc that describes how you can register it.
Neither PPaint nor Photogenics has GIF-support, there isn't even a GIF-datatype.
A snapshot (http://hem.spray.se/joakim.nordstrom/snapshot1.png) of the installed environment.
So there! 8-)
-
Boy what a lot of speculative ####e this is.
I don't turn up here for a few days cause I'm busy and all this crap happens all over again. :-x
@FarQuad
Here's where the problem comes in. Neither Eyetech, Hyperion, nor Amiga Inc themselves are licensed to distribute the Magic Pack Software (and I am sure they are not licensed to distribute Scala, Wordworth, or Photogenics) from the Amiga 1200 Magic Pack.
Got any proof of this?
Maybe someone should contact Scala, Paul Nolan (Photogenics) and the Wordworth people about the fact that their software is being distributed without their knowledge? I'm sure they'd welcome a new license, or the money from the distribution.
Why don't you ask them this yourself? How do you know that they haven't given permission?
@Wayne
I don't know if they do or not, but my FIRM bet is against that they don't.
And how do you come to this conclusion? Eyetech have ALWAYS been above board with every single person I know who has dealt with them.
I've sent e-mails to Scala and Paul Nolan asking for verification.
Let us know if you hear anything.
@Blom
As cgutjahr said, it was Wayne that posted that, I saw it around 3am. He probably removed it so people don't call him out for personal attacks ;-)
-----
On an end note, if this was Genesi releasing the Magic Pack for the Pegasos would everybody be jumping on their backs in a thread like this? I highly doubt it.
-
Someone should change the name of this thread to "The reason why OS4 isn't finished"
-
@ jaokim
You are always great ! :-)
But TurboCalc is licensed to Amiga Technologies if I'm not wrong, but dont think that means so very much.
However this thread leads me to remember a discussion I had with a person on the swedish forum www.amigarulez.org a while ago, who did claim I was doing unethetical business by selling Pegasos which is delivered bundled with software without licensed codecs for playing DVD.
Don't know if he was from the blue or red or yellow camp though...
@ Wayne
Keep up the good work, will be interresting to see whats happening !
-
Isn't there anything more interesting to be discussing rather than hoping to pick apart peoples' or companies' reputations? For all we know tonnes of code could have "found its way" into AmigaOS or MorphOS (or your personal favourite OS) in a highly illegal fashion, but until you've actually got some evidence that might entitle you to start axe-grinding away, but until then...
-
At the end of the day, all this software is very old, most already have it, why make some much fuss, most of you have bought better products so you would uninstall these anyway and most people that buy a AOne willl have some sort of ami background and will do the same.
-
mikeymike wrote:
Isn't there anything more interesting to be discussing rather than hoping to pick apart peoples' or companies' reputations? For all we know tonnes of code could have "found its way" into AmigaOS or MorphOS (or your personal favourite OS) in a highly illegal fashion, but until you've actually got some evidence that might entitle you to start axe-grinding away, but until then...
It'scommon practice in the develpment biz to take code you have written yourself home with you from work. I know I have on many an occasian and most of my colleagues have too. Then when you go work at another firm, you can just plug it in to whatever app you are working on if you need similar functionality.
Does that make me and 99.9% of coders world wide pirates? :-)
-
It'scommon practice in the develpment biz to take code you have written yourself home with you from work. I know I have on many an occasian and most of my colleagues have too. Then when you go work at another firm, you can just plug it in to whatever app you are working on if you need similar functionality.
Does that make me and 99.9% of coders world wide pirates?
Wouldn't that depend a bit on the contract you have with your current employer ? I can't work for another company in the same "field" for a year if I quit mu current job for example..
-
mikeymike:
You are absolutely right. How do we find the way ?
-
seer wrote:
It'scommon practice in the develpment biz to take code you have written yourself home with you from work. I know I have on many an occasian and most of my colleagues have too. Then when you go work at another firm, you can just plug it in to whatever app you are working on if you need similar functionality.
Does that make me and 99.9% of coders world wide pirates?
Wouldn't that depend a bit on the contract you have with your current employer ? I can't work for another company in the same "field" for a year if I quit mu current job for example..
Really? That's sh!t, and most likely illegal under EU law also.
-
Really? That's sh!t, and most likely illegal under EU law also.
I think you're right, but I never looked into it much only know what's in my contract and that some others with a similar contract did go to work for another company in the same field....
But as I have access to every bit of data in the company except personell data, I guess they are afraid that when I leave I could do some serious damage (Well, don't have to leave for that, I can do damage now if I want to.. )
-
seer wrote:
Really? That's sh!t, and most likely illegal under EU law also.
I think you're right, but I never looked into it much only know what's in my contract and that some others with a similar contract did go to work for another company in the same field....
But as I have access to every bit of data in the company except personell data, I guess they are afraid that when I leave I could do some serious damage (Well, don't have to leave for that, I can do damage now if I want to.. )
:lol:
-
It'scommon practice in the develpment biz to take code you have written yourself home with you from work. I know I have on many an occasian and most of my colleagues have too. Then when you go work at another firm, you can just plug it in to whatever app you are working on if you need similar functionality.
Does that make me and 99.9% of coders world wide pirates?
Gawd. What do you think. What does it say in your contract? "Please feel free to distribute any code you write for us with anyone else you deem appropriate"? Don't go twisting that, talking about your own IP because that is different. Just take that comment as is.
-
re: not working for the competition or in the "same field"
That's mainly an American contract thing, and employment law in America is scary.
If any company in Europe pulls anything like that, just tell them to take the clause out the contract before you sign it. If you sign it, you're held to it unless it is absolutely illegal. If it just brushes the law, doesn't quite go in the spirit of a certain act, it is still legal.
-
mikeymike wrote:
It'scommon practice in the develpment biz to take code you have written yourself home with you from work. I know I have on many an occasian and most of my colleagues have too. Then when you go work at another firm, you can just plug it in to whatever app you are working on if you need similar functionality.
Does that make me and 99.9% of coders world wide pirates?
Gawd. What do you think. What does it say in your contract? "Please feel free to distribute any code you write for us with anyone else you deem appropriate"? Don't go twisting that, talking about your own IP because that is different. Just take that comment as is.
Of course it says all work I do is owned by the company, but we all do it anyway. I haven't worked with anyone yet in 8 years of pro development who hasn't done it at one time or another.
-
WOAH !!!
-
@ mdma
Well, you asked the question.
So what's your stance on software piracy then?
-
mikeymike wrote:
@ mdma
Well, you asked the question.
So what's your stance on software piracy then?
Using software without having the correct licence to do so in your ownership, and making money from it.
If I used a cracked copy of OS4 on my Pegasos (And lets be honest, it's a when, not an if, the crack gets released), I think that is perfectly OK for me to do so if I have bought the CSPPC retail version. Is that piracy? Hyperion still get their money.
-
You don't own the code you're re-using, that is owned by the company you wrote it for, as you said your contract says. Your company hasn't licensed you to freely re-use the code you wrote for them. So what's the difference?
And don't sidestep the issue by talking about other software.
-
Is that piracy? Hyperion still get their money
It doesn't matter that "Hyperion still get their money". It's still piracy, because your license will not say you can run it on alternative platforms.
-
mikeymike wrote:
You don't own the code you're re-using, that is owned by the company you wrote it for, as you said your contract says. Your company hasn't licensed you to freely re-use the code you wrote for them. So what's the difference?
And don't sidestep the issue by talking about other software.
I'm not side stepping anything.
I freely admit to re-using code I have written in new apps at different companies.
I've been to some places and seen code written by me that other people have taken with them and passed about.
The market I work in (Until recently), is unlike any other as the development tool is quite different to anything you have ever seen. (http://www.magicsoftware.com)
It's very modular by nature,and lends itself to code borrowing very easily.
Are you disgusted enough yet? I could go on.
I may add I use mostly GPL software at home or stuff I have coded myself, the commercial stuff I own have paid for.
Even Windows, and nobody pays for that! ;-)
-
Wayne wrote:
Is that piracy? Hyperion still get their money
It doesn't matter that "Hyperion still get their money". It's still piracy, because your license will not say you can run it on alternative platforms.
Piracy is stealing. I wouldn't be stealing it. UK law says otherwise too.
-
Wayne wrote:
Is that piracy? Hyperion still get their money
It doesn't matter that "Hyperion still get their money". It's still piracy, because your license will not say you can run it on alternative platforms.
I was thinking the same thing myself there.
But how does this stand under emulation? It's on an alternative platform. Would this mean that everyone who has WinUAE running OS3.5/9 are pirates aswell? Even though they have bought the OS themselves?
This is a very grey area sometimes.
-
Vincent wrote:
Wayne wrote:
Is that piracy? Hyperion still get their money
It doesn't matter that "Hyperion still get their money". It's still piracy, because your license will not say you can run it on alternative platforms.
I was thinking the same thing myself there.
But how does this stand under emulation? It's on an alternative platform. Would this mean that everyone who has WinUAE running OS3.5/9 are pirates aswell? Even though they have bought the OS themselves?
This is a very grey area sometimes.
There's no grey area to me. I abide by the laws of my country. Simple as.
When I buy software I am free to do whatever the hell I want with it, as long as I don't distribute it.
-
There's no grey area to me. I abide by the laws of my country. Simple as.
Law is an animal. Some countries tend to breed very strange mutations, some are more rational. Some months ago BSA was questioned concerning it's actions and motives by our govt. They couldn't answer, from where they get their numbers about the piracy in our country.
-
It doesn't matter that "Hyperion still get their money". It's still piracy, because your license will not say you can run it on alternative platforms.
There are a few ways of countering this.
For starters, I'm sure the license you agree to does not specifically state whether you can use the installation CD as a drinks coaster, but would it be "illegal" for you to do so?
I'm not entirely for adhering to the letter of software licensing, and I'm not pro software piracy. I'm pro my opinion of "fair use".
Another issue is running software under emulation. My personal opinion is that is a "fair use". However, if your contract allows the software to be run under emulation, which is pretty much "not running on its intended hardware platform", then it puts mdma's example of running a cracked copy of OS4 on alternative hardware into a grey area.
One might regard circumventing protective functions of the software as "illegal" (I put illegal in quotes as it can be by the law illegal or by the contract illegal), however I don't see any issue with legally purchasing say a copy of WinXP from a shop, circumventing the protection system so you don't have to give your personal details to MS, which quite frankly, IMO, they don't have a right to, and then using the software as a normal [legal] user would. MS would certainly have issues with it however, and would if they wanted to have you over a barrel in court.
My personal opinion also is that there should be no problem with multiple installations of a product, provided they are only going to be used by the same person, and obviously not at the same time. If you think about it, that lands straight back in the same court as software emulation. I legally own an A1200, KS3.1 ROMs and WB3.1, however I don't use it very often anymore, preferring to emulate the setup instead on my PC.
Software piracy is not a clear cut line between right and wrong, because companies put things in contracts/license agreements that aren't really right.
I am also totally against any copy protection system that limits "fair use" or inhibits convenient legal use of a product.
The other issue is, would it be totally hypocritical if, with me and my opinions on this matter, to use WinXP in the scenario I described above? I don't use WinXP, but anyway.
Another issue is, if anyone is of the opinion that the letter of the contract must be 100% adhered to, regardless, then they are basically supporting software companies to write whatever the hell they like into license agreements/contracts. If your response is "then don't use their products", my response is "what if all software companies did that?".
-
@Wayne:
We are now entering a very gray area where you are technically breaking the license, but are morally still in the clear. Or rather, not as tarnished as to say you've done something Despicably Evil. Take the OS4 example. I wouldn't call it piracy, on the conditions that you payed for the original, keep the 'cracked' OS4 to yourself, and don't use the original and patch side by side for extended periods of time, unless you have more licences. (A practical definition would be 'no longer than 15 minutes a day', for example.)
It's like the no-CD patches for games. *All* of my (PC) games are originals. At one point in time, I upgraded my CD-ROM drive only to discover that about half of those games would not work any longer because the drive couldn't handle the copy protection mechanisms. If I were to apply your method of reasoning, I would have to stop playing the games, and complain very loudly and bitterly to the manufacturer until they released new firmware, or keep exchanging drives until I find one which works. It is unlikely that a big company will release a software update just to please me, and computer stores don't like customers returning products in rapid succession. (I know of a store which would 'test' the drive, conclude there is nothing wrong with it, and deny me the refund.) So I used a 'no CD' crack in order to play the games. Are you now going to report me to the authorities for software piracy? (Truth be told, I discovered that the drive was truly broken, so I was able to get a proper refund, and buy a new one. I discontinued use of the cracks after I found out the new drive handled the protections flawlessly.)
-
@ Cymric
/me looks at my post, looks at yours, looks at times posted... whoa... :-)
-
@mikeymike
I agree with most of your points.
Running an Os through emu is ok as the Os does not have to be illegaly hacked for it to run thus the OS can be bought in most cases with the coder getting paied, where as illegal hacked version can not.
If someone hacked version of X-
Box HALO for PS2, the chances of PS2 users going out to buy the X-BOX version to stay legal is nil with the HALO coders loseing out.
I can see at times why ppl want the protections removed as it can be a real pain having to type things in everytime you want to use it with amiga games but that rare to have to do that more than once now with more recent software.
The MicroSoft protection is just not on because its intrusive.
There is no excuse to remove non intrusive passive protection tho to get it to run on hardware it was not intened as you then open the software up to piracy.
The Software that a platform has is its leverage over the others and is used to entice you over to that plat form if more of what you want is available for that platform wich non of us have the legal right to break by hacking.
-
@Alkemyst
If someone hacked version of X-
Box HALO for PS2, the chances of PS2 users going out to buy the X-BOX version to stay legal is nil with the HALO coders loseing out
Not that i would condone such activity, but how would they lose out, if it aint available to ps2 owners "ie made for ps2" they would make no sale to ps2 customers, so how would they lose out?
-
@ Alkemyst
If someone hacked version of X-
Box HALO for PS2, the chances of PS2 users going out to buy the X-BOX version to stay legal is nil with the HALO coders loseing out.
Presumably you mean they uploaded the ISO somewhere and everyone downloaded it from there, rather than buying the incompatible x-box version, then downloading the ISO [the way that supports the Halo coders]? If so, I agree with you.
There is no excuse to remove non intrusive passive protection tho to get it to run on hardware it was not intened as you then open the software up to piracy.
Hmm, not sure on this one.
If you cracked software to run on hardware it wasn't meant to run on, say OS4 for example, and then made it freely available on the net, that would be wrong IMO. If you just cracked it for your own purposes, or someone else cracked it for you, but you had bought a copy of OS4 already, that would be ok. Just. That someone else is probably doing something wrong as it is unlikely they know for sure that you own a copy of OS4 legally.
The Software that a platform has is its leverage over the others and is used to entice you over to that plat form if more of what you want is available for that platform wich non of us have the legal right to break by hacking.
Hmm, agree with you very slightly, ish. However, the platform's advantages should be enough to entice you to buy it as well.
Don't you see that you're drawing a very fine line between OS emulation and what you were just saying? Legal and illegal must be plain and simple, not a difficult to draw line.
-
Not that i would condone such activity, but how would they lose out, if it aint available to ps2 owners "ie made for ps2" they would make no sale to ps2 customers, so how would they lose out?
Eaxmple: Hey i think i will get an X-Box because i can buy for HALO for it. The friend says dont bother get a PS2 as there is hacked version on the net for it= lost sale of HALO and X-BOX.
I bought my A1200 secondhand near new it came with 80 priated games & only 4 boxed games. the guy already had a pc when i bought it.
Its clear to me that he got the A1200 because of easy piracy.
BTW all pirated disk had been thrown away long ago.
-
This thread is hilarious...
For starters, the reason people are buying AmigaOnes is for the AmigaOnes themselves, not for PPCUAE.
Secondly, does anyone really care? I mean, the whole selling point behind AmigaOne is the promise of OS4, not outdated classic software from a pack which is approaching ten years old?
Thirdly, if Genesi were doing this, would anyone with any authority on this site bat an eyelid (me thinks not)?
Fourthly, if it is illegal (i.e. being carried out without licence) I find Eyetech a pretty unlikely source of mass software piracy - it could be an oversight...
Why is it people on this site have to get on their high horses over EVERY little thing a company within the Amiga community does (bar Genesi of course)
-
I imagine Eyetech have a Licence to sell hard drives for the Commodore Amiga with this software installed.
But what we have to ask ourselves is the linux based AmigaONE in any way covered by such a licence? Assuming such a licence exists.
-
@ Mikeymike:
Well, an obvious and classical case of 'great minds think alike'. Of course, I'm not a moderator, so I might be presuming a bit too much, but you get the idea... ;-)
-
Hmm, not sure on this one.
If you cracked software to run on hardware it wasn't meant to run on, say OS4 for example, and then made it freely available on the net, that would be wrong IMO. If you just cracked it for your own purposes, or someone else cracked it for you, but you had bought a copy of OS4 already, that would be ok. Just. That someone else is probably doing something wrong as it is unlikely they know for sure that you own a copy of OS4 legally.
I agree but the chances of a cracked version of an OS staying in the hands of the legal owner is highly unlikely. Its just needs one person to make the cracked version available to the net then its all over.
Hmm, agree with you very slightly, ish. However, the platform's advantages should be enough to entice you to buy it as well.
Don't you see that you're drawing a very fine line between OS emulation and what you were just saying? Legal and illegal must be plain and simple, not a difficult to draw line.
The platform is the lesser priorty for the avgjoe [we are not the avg joe] as its the software that shows off the ability of the platform.
The the first i had seen of the amiga was on the way home from school the juggler demo knocked my socks off, wow i had to get the Hardware that could do that, AMIGA, nothing else in the shop showed anything like that, i knew nothing of the hardware at the time,even if there was better hardware in the shop at the time i new nothing of them when none was doing what the AMIGA was.
I have no problem with emulation as far as software goes as that makes no difference to piracy as to others useing the real hardware to a point tho because most [not all] emu ppl are not dedicated to the platform they are emulating and may be more enclined to use copied OS & software. but both can buy the legal version of the OS or SW.
But it is a loss to hardware sales if the software is exclusive to a platform & if that title is a killer leverage apps for the platform.
-
Hmm. Thread actually got interesting.
Well, I routinely crack PC-CD protection routines. I do so for several reasons:
I think it is the wrong approach anyway, only harms end users and does not prevent piracy.
I don't want to have the stupid CD in the drive all the time. My drives are valuable, I don't want them knackered because they are continuously being spun up and spun down merely to retrieve tiny packets that give a PUBLISHER peace of mind.
I have friends whose drives refuse to read certain types of protection. I have supplied them with software that emulates the protection and 'clean' ISOs burnt to CD. They all have the "legal" CDs they just can't use them. My old laptop also had the same issue.
That bit about the publisher is important, by the way. Case in point: Neverwinter Nights. It was their European publishers who insisted on the crappy protections routines. I was able (had I wanted to) to download the ISOs for the game, with cracked protection, weeks before I was able to purchase it legally. It therefore clearly did nothing to prevent piracy. It did however prevent my friend from running his legally purchased product. Ultimately the protection was stripped from the binaries, with a patch, by the NWN team themself.
Piracy? What do you reckon?
-
@ Cymric
Well, an obvious and classical case of 'great minds think alike'. Of course, I'm not a moderator
Well you've got to have an IQ of at least 225 in order to moderate here, the discussions are always so educated :-)
@ Alkemyst
I agree.
@ Rudei
re: magic packs
Secondly, does anyone really care? I mean, the whole selling point behind AmigaOne is the promise of OS4, not outdated classic software from a pack which is approaching ten years old?
I have to agree with that too :-)
Thirdly, if Genesi were doing this, would anyone with any authority on this site bat an eyelid (me thinks not)?
Ick. I think they would. There are probably as many Amiga trolls as MorphOS trolls on amiga.org. Please don't provoke them.
Why is it people on this site have to get on their high horses over EVERY little thing a company within the Amiga community does (bar Genesi of course)
It's not just here, or this community. It is on every semi-technical, reasonably popular public forum I've ever seen in action.
@ Gaidheal
IMO, not piracy.
-
Hi,
This thread is really not about spreading bsh*t or something like that. It is about following the rules. What if I have a program on that magic pack and some years ago I made a deal for it to be spread with the Amiga 1200. And now it's there with the A1. What if I do not want that? You see, it's about that and not something else.
Coder
-
This thread is full of #### - I bought a magic pack software bundle from Eyetech last year and it was all legit.
-
I did a couple of years ago as well, got proper manuals, licence keys, properly printed floppy disks. Of course it could all be an elaborate hoax, but I doubt that.