Amiga PCs on the way....

[the_leander]

It is even more fun when they mock any deaths in your family (see moobunny).

That was a lie when you said it on AW.net and it's a lie now.

Whilst moobunny regulars didn't break down with crocodile tears regarding the death of mcbill's niece? We stopped far short of mockery.

@Hooligan

Yes, we're still there.

[the_leander]

Some people keep hammering on this. All I can say is, good luck finding companies that you consider legitimate and respectful.

There are plenty of companies out there that respect copyright. Of those that don't, most have the good grace (not to mention sense of self preservation) to honour a licence when they're caught out.

To do otherwise is inviting a life altering lawsuit.

At the very least, altering the work in question to hide or disguise it's creator goes far beyond the story given out of "oh well if they copyright holder contacts us" crap.

Do you refuse to with these non-legitimate respectful businesses?

Where at all possible I know I do. Which is why I don't buy Coca Cola, Nestlé or Kraft (the new owners of Cadburys).

[the_leander]

How about Microsoft?  Do you use any products from Microsoft?  Or Apple?  They are both famous for IP infringement.

As I said, where possible. It is easier to avoid Apple than it is Microsoft however.

[the_leander]

I could give you a whole lot more to add to that list (and you'd probably end up as a vegetarian in the process) but kudos from me on a damn fine start.

Ta, tbh I don't tend to buy much meat, though when I do I try to get locally produced stuff. And the list is quite a bit longer than that, it's just I figured stick to the big ones

C= actions whilst illegal and immoral, don't really rate highly, but, because what they're offering is what I would consider to be a luxury (or very niche) item, I find it trivially easy to dismiss them for it.

Don't forget McDonald's, Pillsbury and Kebblers.

Even if McDonald's were the most ethical company on earth I wouldn't eat there - their food is vile, tasteless pap. In the UK they don't even offer a decent management training scheme as they do in the US.

Never heard of the other two.

[the_leander]

So, basically, you feel good about not buying things from companies that you wouldn't do business with anyway.

I didn't say that, way to miss the point.

 If that is your thing, that's fine.  It doesn't change the fact that all of the people hammering away at CUSA for being this huge villain for doing what is down right common, is ridiculous, and 99% of the time hypocritical.

Oh you're bringing figures into this, presumably you've some evidence to back up not only the number but the claim of hypocrisy..

Is the posting of the picture illegal?  

Copyright infringement.

That they went a stage further and actually altered the picture only compounds the issue.

About as illegal as a restaurant staff singing 'Happy Birthday' to a patron.  Is it immoral?  Again, about as immoral as a restaurant staff singing 'Happy Birthday' to a patron.

Strawman.

[the_leander]

Honestly, I'm against copyright protection in both areas.

Fine.

Happy Birthday is so commonly sung, it shouldn't be an issue, since the owners of the copyright know it's in the public domain now due to the nature of the song.

Except it isn't. Now whether you like it or not, that's the law. Don't like it? Get the law changed.

Likewise, if you don't want someone else to post your image somewhere else, possibly modified, don't post it to the World Wide Web -- it's the antithesis of a private medium.

Heh, fortunately content creators do have legal levers they can pull when freetards start taking liberties.

[the_leander]

Oh…..ONE MORE THING !!!! All you self righteous self appointed moral compasses out there with the huge mouths and not much else. JUST WHO LICENSED AMIGA.ORG THE AMIGA TRADEMARK PROPERTY APPEARING ON YOUR BANNER MASTHEAD???   NO ONE!![/I][/FONT][/COLOR]
Any comments on that flagrant violation of trademark law? I'll be most interested in a reply to that one. Very interested.

Amiga.Inc in various guises have specifically approved of the name over the years. Also this website is a news and community site, not a company attempting to sell computers and whilst the banner might include the name Amiga in it, it's full name is "Amiga.org" which has been around for over a decade and is a well established trademark in it's own right.

I also don't like the implied threat that is being made here.

[/I]OK, like I said a bit harsh, but apparently heartfelt. Comments?
[/FONT][/COLOR]

Barry has delusions of grandeur who is going to get himself into serious trouble if he continues to take the liberties he is with regard copyright.

If he continues to breach copyright and plagiarise the way he is, sooner rather than later he will find himself on the business end of a life altering lawsuit.

I don't really blame the guy... instead of constructive comments on his business, he gets nothing but shit from the people he assumed would be happy.

Besides using someone-else's artwork, what did he do wrong?  He is just trying to run a business, not a hobby.

There was also the fact that his descriptions of the re-badged Cybernet was more or less plagiarised from Apple.

Oh and more recently the faux legal letter attempting to silence OSNews.

[the_leander]

I don't necessarily agree with his methods but I think there's a lesson here for any company trying to make a living off the name.

What, you mean like have a product that you can ship that isn't outrageously priced, that may appeal to more than just your current fanbase?

[the_leander]

Hi, OT, but hmm isn't Happy Birthday coming out of copyright very soon?

Chances are depending on where you live it probably is.

The issue in the US at least is that Disney will continue to push for extensions on copyright to prevent Mickey Mouse falling out of it.

[the_leander]

Actually looked on Wiki, in Europe it runs out during December 31, 2016 and further copyright extension will not be granted.

I gotta say, if the EU actually develops the balls to say no to a further extension when the time comes, I'll be very surprised.

[the_leander]

The one thing you've faulted him on (using someone else's artwork w/o permission) could be corrected if the property owner contacted him. I'm sure he'd be willing to work out a deal for the use of the image.

The thing that annoyed me wasn't that he took an image that didn't belong to him. It was that he deliberately tried to alter it to disguise its provenance.

Not to mention his plagiarised description of the cybernet.

And whilst we're at it.

His faux legal threats to an established, respected news site - OSNews.

Oh and let us not forget - his implied threat against this site.

[the_leander]

I don't see his mention of the unauthorized use of the term Amiga in Amiga.org's name as a threat. Only Bill McEwen could issue a threat based on that (and he's never shown any such inclination).I think the point was that his use was legitimate (and that Amiga.org was using that  trademark without authorization).

Firstly, for there to be a potential trademark issue, they would have to be in the same market or at least similar enough that there might be some confusion in the mind of an average persion. Secondly, you have to defend your trademarks, thirdly and finally, Amiga.inc has repeatedly said they have no issue with Amiga.org.

If Trademarks worked they way you and he are implying, the vast majority of Mac rumour sites would have been shut down 10 minutes after they were fired up.

If you don't see the implied threat, well, you might want to re-read

JUST WHO LICENSED AMIGA.ORG THE AMIGA TRADEMARK PROPERTY APPEARING ON YOUR BANNER MASTHEAD??? NO ONE!!
Any comments on that flagrant violation of trademark law? I'll be most interested in a reply to that one. Very interested.

Given his attempt to squelch free speech using inapplicable Georgia law copied off of a website dealing with chilling effects (yes, ironic) of dicey legal threats, I don't think I'll be taking lessons on Trademarks from this fella.

As to a faux legal threat, is Hyperion suing anyone?

Nice dodge of the issue, but wrong threat.

And you guys seem fixated on that artwork and the Pheonix manual.

If it had simply been the case that he'd grabbed the image and put it up, chances are most people wouldn't have given a crap. It was that he altered it to hide who had made the piece as well as other alterations that irritated folk.

[the_leander]

I stopped paying attention, when did this guy threaten AO? Link please.

He didn't threaten it outright (apparently even his crassness knows limits)

What he said specifically was:

Oh…..ONE MORE THING !!!! All you self righteous self appointed moral compasses out there with the huge mouths and not much else. JUST WHO LICENSED AMIGA.ORG THE AMIGA TRADEMARK PROPERTY APPEARING ON YOUR BANNER MASTHEAD???   NO ONE!! Any comments on that flagrant violation of trademark law? I'll be most interested in a reply to that one. Very interested.

Which is utter balls.

[the_leander]

That wasn't really a counter argument.

Since Amiga.org has been here for years (w/o challenge), there's no real threat.

Just a point.

Clearly you didn't bother reading the response directed at you.

Your (and his) "point" is utter bunkum.

Even ignoring for the moment that Amiga.inc have stated in the past that there is no issue with AO,  Trademarks do not work that way.

[the_leander]

So how does Barry define "support in every way possible" ?

Why, as with every shady businessman - that which directly supports Barry is good, anything that can only be defined vaguely as indirect support or simply not, is bad and is rejected out of hand.

Or does his dishonesty extend from copyright infringement to lying in press releases and to potential customers ?

As if you even have to ask