AmigaOS 3.9 Boing Bag #3

[SilvrDrgn]

Amiga OS files cannot be freely redistributed without permission (not even in patched form because the new files still contain copyrighted data).  That's why various unofficial patch archives (eg. see Aminet) contain only patch data (.pch files) and not the full patched files.  If there is any other non-AmigaOS copyrighted files in the "BB3" archive being redistributed without permission, then that's not right either.

[TheMagicM]

Why would you want to delete things if you don't know if they are pirated or not?  Here we go with the old "Guilty until proven innocent" crap.  As far as I can see all of the updates in the BB3 are public domain, freeware, etc.  If you go do a search in aminet you will find just about everything.  Where did the complaint come from that would inspire you to leave that post?

Read slvrdrgn's post and you'll see why.  As far as who complained, I did.

[dannyp1]

I guess my question then is, if you were the one who complained, what were you complaining about when you said yourself that you didn't know if the files were legal or not.  I can perfectly understand your questioning if they were legal (We all need to get our jollies somehow).  I do not understand the threat to start erasing things.  If these are pch patches and things released as freeware such as xad and AHI then you have no complaint. There are enough people spending their time on the English Board already.  Are you trying to chase more people there?

[Argo]

We are not trying to sent people from this site, but protect it. If there are original copyrighted (even patched version of the originals) in the file linked and the owner finds out, then they can have this site shut down. It's happened before. We were down for three or four days a few years ago over someone posting another person's (owner of Amiga Web Directory) event pictures.
If the Boing Bag just has the patch files and installs by patching the original files, then that would be fine.
Sucks, but this is what keeps us running. One DCMA violations letter to our ISP and we go offline.

[dannyp1]

Thank you Argo for being polite and not having an attitude.  The guys doing the BB3 have been trying real hard to get it right and it just kind of bothers me when someone jumps in with a chip on their shoulder and starts threatning to erase things.

[TheMagicM]

I guess my question then is, if you were the one who complained, what were you complaining about when you said yourself that you didn't know if the files were legal or not.  I can perfectly understand your questioning if they were legal (We all need to get our jollies somehow).  I do not understand the threat to start erasing things.  If these are pch patches and things released as freeware such as xad and AHI then you have no complaint. There are enough people spending their time on the English Board already.  Are you trying to chase more people there?

maybe you read between the lines and tried to find a reason to argue?  My question was without attitude.  If you know me, you'll know I dont usually ask, I just delete stuff thats questionable.  Thats what I do.  My job isnt to hold your hand and tuck you in at night, its to make sure the owners site doesnt get taken down because of questionable material, among other things.  

As far as "If you go do a search in aminet you will find just about everything".  Thats Aminet, not Amiga.org.  

-Alex

[LoadWB]

We are not trying to sent people from this site, but protect it. If there are original copyrighted (even patched version of the originals) in the file linked and the owner finds out, then they can have this site shut down. It's happened before. We were down for three or four days a few years ago over someone posting another person's (owner of Amiga Web Directory) event pictures.
If the Boing Bag just has the patch files and installs by patching the original files, then that would be fine.
Sucks, but this is what keeps us running. One DCMA violations letter to our ISP and we go offline.

You need a better ISP, then.  Frankly, ISPs who respond immediately and with prejudice to any supposed DMCA notice are pansies.

There are strict requirements to DMCA notices, and 90% of a random sampling from last year (no cite because I am hazy today) were incomplete or otherwise invalid.  In addition, all it takes is a response to the DMCA notice from the supposed offender to get the content back on-line.  At that point, the ISP has fulfilled the safe-harbor provision and all interaction is from then on between the alleged offender and the complainant.

None the less, many ISPs just piss themselves when they get a DMCA and take down the site, anyway.  As a hosting provider myself, I put the onus on the complainant to prove the validity of the notice, not one of which has been proper, and give the alleged offender and opportunity to respond before acting.  Never has one been followed up on.

Of course, I have only dealt with the carpet-bombed MPAA and RIAA types, and even a law firm which took it upon itself to enforce copyrights which it didn't even represent.  So I cannot account for the individual copyright owner who retains legal representation for such a matter.

I have my own reservations on the whole copyright issue, but I stay within the law.  Unfortunately, it is becoming common for operators of sites which just link to offending material to be held accountable (and I mean just a link to a page, not even directly to the material.)  This means that I could potentially bomb a site by putting a link to my own, and then within my site have all sorts of copyright violations.

PCI (Payment Card Industry) regulations are just about the same, but that is a discussion for another topic and time

[Gulliver]

Discussions are allways healthy. This site does not host any files at all, but allways allowed freedom of speech. So wether we like or not the subject in discussion, it is allways a good exercise to be open minded and tolerant.
By the way, the use and installation of BoingBag3 has allways been at your own risk, and implies you have a legit copy of the AmigaOS 3.9 cdrom.
This BoingBag was never official, it is a community effort. That is the reason why it is called "Unofficial BoingBag 3". So if you are looking for Amiga inc. or Haage & Partner endorsement on the project you are looking in the wrong basket.
The entire project was based on my own prerrogatives.I mean that after being an AmigaOS 3.9 user, i thought what if all those upgrades, bugfixes and enhancements around the web for AmigaOS 3.9 could be assembled in a list in an informative way so that everyone that had AmigaOS 3.9 could take the time and effort if they wished, to upgrade their OS.
The project is really cool, from a 68k Amiga user point of view, and many people started to send their own suggestions, and their own software for it.
It grew in a way that i was offered webhosting to put all that information over there. At first i received so many emails and enquiries for particular items, and it took too much time to answer them all, that i had to directly link the files that were required for such BoingBag. A really good guy, with his clear intentions to  help our little Amiga community, tryed to create an installer including everything that would make BoingBag 3 something usefull for everyone out there that did not have the skills or time to gather and assemble the BoingBag 3 for themselves.
So in the end if you are still wondering if this is right or wrong, if it is legal or illegal, you should contract a lawyer and speak with a priest of your particular religion, and i am not one or the other. I mean you are allways on your own to find subjective answers to questions i really dont know, how they are or should be answered. Some things are legal in some countries, in others not. Some things are good for some people others see it as terribly wrong. You should decide.

[Minuous]

Quick question....is anything in that archive pirated? I will wait (for a short while) for a reply before I delete stuff.

No, I have just asked for and received confirmation that the MooVid version in question has been released to the community by the developer Lazlo Torok.

Re. patches: The other four Boing Bags are not distributed as patches. If someone wants to waste their time turning hundreds of useful files back into patch files and then rewriting the installer script and retesting everything, to produce a less useful archive, they can do so. I certainly have no intention of wasting my time doing such a thing.

[Piru]

Is there license and legal documentation included on each and every component in the BB3 archive? If not, there should be, I think.

Distributing 3rd party files (even if freeware) can be a tricky business. For example: What if some distributor suddenly would start to sell BB3 on a CD? Would all (possibly unwilling) contributors be happy with that?

For example aminet files have "Distribution" field in their readme, with possibility to specify NoCD if you didn't like aminet guys selling your stuff.

[cha05e90]

Is there license and legal documentation included on each and every component in the BB3 archive?

- Yes, I think that's essential.
- Second: Someone shouldn't put original, copyrighted files in whatever "Community-BoingBag" - even a "patched" version still has the copyright (someone mentioned this before AFAIRC...).
- It must have been a huge and btw very welcome work to search all these files and make a package - so spending some more time to make it "perfect" (i.e. using original distributions, like CD-ROMS, as a patch base) should be possible.

[Gulliver]

I agree on what Piru said! I am going to try to take care of that.

Most likely it will say something like that you are entitled to use it, if only you got the legitimate AmigaOS 3.9 cdrom. You can distribute the BoingBag 3 using any media only if you keep all the files in it intact, and provided you do it free of any charge at all. You are not allowed to distribute this BoingBag with other software and charge money for the entire package or bundle. It cannot be given away free as an extra for the purchase of another product. No media and shipping charges are allowed for distribution.
And will add the usual disclaimer that we are not liable for damages of the use or missuse of the product.

All trademarks and software products are copyrights of their respective owners.

Plus a list of credits & contributors & acknowledgements

PS: I know it is not well written, but then that is the concept. If someone wants to help, you are welcome!

PS 2: So yes NOCD, so that they dont add it to an Aminet CD and sell it!

[Akiko]

@Gulliver

I really appreciate your efforts with this project.. Cheers

[LoadWB]

@Gulliver

I really appreciate your efforts with this project.. Cheers

I have to second and third this, as well.  And the comments by Piru.

Full steam ahead, fellas.  Your efforts are certainly appreciated.

[cha05e90]

No, I have just asked for and received confirmation that the MooVid version in question has been released to the community by the developer Lazlo Torok.

Interesting that it is still available here: http://www.reg.net/authors.asp?AuthorID=3759
So? Free or not free?

[dannyp1]

Did you read the post that you quoted?  That answers your question.