Is Eyetech pirating the A1200 Magic Pack software?

[mikeymike]

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...

[mikeymike]

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.

[mikeymike]

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]

@ mdma

Well, you asked the question.

So what's your stance on software piracy then?

[mikeymike]

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.

[mikeymike]

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?".

[mikeymike]

@ Cymric

/me looks at my post, looks at yours, looks at times posted... whoa... :-)

[mikeymike]

@ 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.

[mikeymike]

@ 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.

[mikeymike]

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.