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

[desiv]

@Franko
I did not close the other thread.

Well, the other thread was closed with yours as the last post, so that was a fair assumption.. ;-)

As for AmigaForever, it is (IMHO) a great product.
I think people should support Cloanto and I do belive Cloanto helps the Amiga community, so it's a great situation.

However, it sounds like, from the licensing, Cloanto is a solution for a virtualized Amiga and not a "legal" way to acquire Workbenches and kickstarts for your physical Amiga.

As a result, Cloanto isn't the answer, unless you are saying, "Out of the solutions that aren't fully legal, Cloanto is the best choice."
(Which I might agree with, but I am hearing that the images on the Cloanto distribution might not be true originals??  :confused::confused:  and might not work on a real Amiga??? :confused:)

desiv

[desiv]

It'll be interesting to see what happens..
My guess is that Cloanto is just trying to bluff your ISP into removing the files, as I would doubt they own the rights.
I believe (could definitely be wrong) that they have the rights to distribute Workbench, and probably only for use in their emulation distribution.
If that's the case, they wouldn't be the ones to get you to stop.
It would be like Amazon telling you to remove Harry Potter from your website (assuming you had the book to DL) because they also sell it.
Wouldn't happen.  It would have to be the copyright owner (or whomever the copyright owner has delegated those rights to) to issue that statement.

Especially with all the "grey area" involved in the ownership..

Now, that doesn't mean your ISP won't cave and remove the files.
That type of thing (not the owner sending cease letters) happens all the time, and frequently works..  

desiv

[desiv]

... If it turns out that Cloanto doesn't have shit to back their IP claims up, something good will come out of it!.

Well, all that would really prove is that Cloanto would be overstepping their license, and they might be in trouble for filing false takedown claims, but that's unlikely.  

Someone still owns it, of course, it's all so muddled, it's possible that whoever it is doesn't realize that they own it.  ;-)

desiv

[desiv]

Just to get this straight

er..  No, you missed the point...  :confused:
Perhaps you should re-read the thread..

desiv

[desiv]

And to point out something, it doesn't have to be Franko vs Cloanto.
To me, it's "Franko's idea about Workbench disk images for real Amigas" vs "Cloanto's idea about his distribution of said images."

What I mean by that is:
I like Cloanto..
I like Amiga Forever..  
I like PPaint...
I think Cloanto is a net positive for the Amiga community..

AND

I think Franko might be right about disk images for Workbench for real Amigas.

desiv

[desiv]

That's all this was ever about.

Really?  That's all you see?  You've missed most of the fun....  :lol:
(nuance)

desiv

[desiv]

IANAL, but it's nice to see so many here.. ;-)

Most (if not all) contracts drafted by Amiga Inc appear to contain a clause that requires the other party to protect the rights of Amiga Inc.

That's a funny one, because when you break it down, it's legally questionable.

It doesn't appear that actual ownership or even legal rights to "protect on behalf of"  have been transferred in these cases, just the phrase that they are required to...
So, problems?  Yes..
How do they do that?  Complain (as Cloanto has done).  Yes, but the problem there is that "take-down" letters have been challenged quite a lot recently (thank you RIAA), and it appears that you really have to be the legal owner or have been specifically transferred the rights to do so.

It's seriously doubtful that this is the case..  It's much more likely that the above type of wording is all that there is..

So, what would they be expected to do to "protect the rights" legally if they shouldn't send notices themselves?  Why, I would think they would be required to notify the legal owner so that they can send said letters.

So, just because something is in an Amiga contract, that doesn't necessarily mean much...
Contracts frequently have things in them that aren't legally viable.
That's why we have contract attorneys..  :roflmao:

Also, Thanx Piru for providing that image..  It shows that Cloanto does in fact have rights specific for AmigaForever.  
So, anyone providing the files specifically for emulation should have reason to give pause..

desiv

[desiv]

A decent read (and this, being a legal discussion, means it's just a decent opinion, there is no right/wrong until it's gone to court, and even then it's questionable. ;-) is:
http://www.artquest.org.uk/artlaw/copyright/using-other-artists-work/orphan-works.htm

I found this bit relevant:
 

...the responsibility is placed on any prospective user of a copyright work to prove that they have undertaken duly diligent enquiries to trace the copyright owner in order to have reasonably concluded that the author died 70 or more years earlier. Such research must be undertaken before embarking on their copying or merchandising venture.

Now, whether or not anyone feels Franko has "undertaken duly diligent enquiries" is up for discussion...

desiv

[desiv]

By which definition? Commentary? Criticism? News reporting? Research? Teaching? Parody?

Based on this thread, I'd say all of the above...

desiv

[desiv]

I, for one, would be happy to provide a full set of physical copies to anyone that needs them, provided they pay for or supply the media.

I agree with this, and I've sent copies of WB on floppy to people to get them started before, but there was some discussion of this on another forum and someone found the original legal wording that came with the disks and it basically said you couldn't do that..
(Sorry, can't remember the specifics, but it's not uncommon to include that type of wording..)

So, someone (Cloanto or whomever) would have to have a license to do that.
Currently, it appears Cloanto's license is too specific (to AmigaForever usage) for them to do that..
(and currently they are apparently distributing modified disk images for use with their emulation, not the original disks, which further muddles the issue)

I still think that would be great, but it begs the whole original question, "who own's that?"....

desiv

[desiv]

So if I want to distribute Workbench disks who should I contact?

And THAT is the question.
Franko is trying to "force" someone to step up.
Technically, you should "undertake duly diligent enquiries to trace the copyright owner."

For me, I'd probably start by sending certified, notarized, stamped, signed, sealed, delivered (did I just break into song there?) legal documents (Yes, I'd run it by a real lawyer) to some of the more obvious people:
Hyperion
Amiga Inc
In fact, on their web page, Amiga.com has:

For information on licensing, or sales of any Amiga Operating System, please use our Contact form.

I'm not saying they are the ones, but that's probably where you'd start..
There is no real legal grounds for abandoment, as Piru has mentioned, unless it is specified.  That is, a company can "choose" to abandon their copyright, which most often when it happens (which isn't often) is that they release it publically themselves.

desiv

[desiv]

At least in the US, anyone is allowed to make and use a backup of any software they are legally entitled to, regardless of what it says in the packaging.

Even that isn't always clear legally..
Although I do it personally.. ;-)

desiv

[desiv]

One does not exclude the other. A license may grant a right to sublicense.

Yes, but based on the document Piru produced, it appears that Cloanto is the licensee in this case..

desiv

[desiv]

Does Franko have permission from the copyright holder to distribute Workbench disks?

If he doesn't, it's illegal.

It's really as simple as that.

That is definitely not true..

This is copyright law.  Nothing is simple..  ;-)

It's most likely a violation of the copyright, but even that could be questionable.

In fact, it could be a legally recommended step if he has already taken appropriate actions to try to contact the legal copyright holder...

I'm not saying he has or hasn't..  Just saying..

desiv

[desiv]

I fail to see how. Regardless whether the copyright owner reacts or not, it still is and will remain an infringement.
Trademarks need to be defended, however.

I didn't say it would alleviate the infringement in and of itself.

I said "it could be a legally recommended step"....

That step would be in trying to get the copyright holder to come forward.
It's not uncommon, however you have to go through the process of making serious attempts to contact the copyright holder first.

The "endgame" would be the contact of the copyright holder to get rights, or a specific deny.

I'm not talking trademarks at all here..

As I said, there is no "simple" in this, and those who think it is, on either side, are likely to be wrong..

desiv