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

[runequester]

I guess you don't know about all the pirates that were busted in those days. It wasn't the people who copied games who got raided, it was the ones operating pobox numbers who were involved in large scale piracy.
 
Putting adf's on a web page isn't the same as two kids swapping games and copying them at home. One nobody even knows about, while putting prominent links on a public site is going to get noticed real quick.

This is very true. I normally try to avoid the piracy talk but I will say there's a difference between kids swapping games that are being sold, and people downloading said game 20 years later for a platform that has been dead for who knows how long.


I know it's copyright infringement either way, but they'd be damn hard pressed to show what losses were incurred because you downloaded Shadow of the Beast for the amiga.

[psxphill]

I know it's copyright infringement either way, but they'd be damn hard pressed to show what losses were incurred because you downloaded Shadow of the Beast for the amiga.

What about if it was available on virtual console/xbox live/psn?

[commodorejohn]

What about if it was available on virtual console/xbox live/psn?

That wouldn't help a hell of a lot for those of us who don't have a current-gen console, now, would it? Certainly VC and the like are cool services for console owners, and it's neat that the manufacturers are finally starting to cotton to the idea that gamers might like to play stuff that's older than five years, but some of us would just like to play our games on the real thing, thankyoumuch.

[runequester]

What about if it was available on virtual console/xbox live/psn?

Easier to prove a loss I imagine as there's now an actual product involved.

Now, Im not sure how many xbox downloads they could show are lost because you downloaded the floppy version of a 20 year gone computer.

But at least we're sort of closer

[Franko]

Seems instead he found this group wasn't worth the effort of an argument.

How about an edit on the rest of that mess before someone warms up the report button?

Plaz

Almost correct in your assumption but not quite...

You see this thread became nothing more than the usual armchair experts in all things copyright and legal experts in their own minds, posting the usual repetitive drivel on their own "expert" (but highly flawed) interpretations of the various copyright/ trademark laws, as usual they failed to even comprehend the original topic and question...

It also became nothing more than certain folk who haven't owned or used a real Amiga in years doing their best (for whatever strange reason they have) of trying to prevent genuine Amiga hardware users from being able to obtain easily some very old software that no-one who allegedly owns it could care less about...

The only good that came of this thread was the revelation that Cloanto, despite not being the copyright holders are the only party guilty of preventing this 20 odd year old software from being made easily and legally available to those who still wish to obtain it...

So I removed all my posts as a) I had found part of the answer I was looking for (all be it unexpectedly) and b) to make the the pathetic drivel of the armchair lawyers look even more pathetic and ridiculous than they really are (if that is at all possible)...

So there you have it, the thread partially served its purpose and provided me with some of the answers I was seeking and now I can carry on quietly with my original intention of getting to the bottom of all this without the distraction of the loony copyright mafia squad...

[LordSpunky]

The only good that came of this thread was the revelation that Cloanto, despite not being the copyright holders are the only party guilty of preventing this 20 odd year old software from being made easily and legally available to those who still wish to obtain it...

Maybe it isn't Cloanto's fault if they only hold the license for emulation.
But all maybe not lost, there maybe a solution to keep everyone happy.
Bare with, watch this space and we will see if anything happens.

[dammy]

Almost correct in your assumption but not quite...

You see this thread became nothing more than the usual armchair experts in all things copyright and legal experts in their own minds, posting the usual repetitive drivel on their own "expert" (but highly flawed) interpretations of the various copyright/ trademark laws, as usual they failed to even comprehend the original topic and question...

I would say the opposite is true.  You are the one who didn't understand the legal aspects and had to back down, not the "armchair experts."

[Piru]

trying to prevent genuine Amiga hardware users from being able to obtain easily some very old software that no-one who allegedly owns it could care less about...

At least I personally have absolutely no problem with someone downloading a Workbench disk ADF to replace a dead one. In my view they can consider the download as being a "remote backup" of their original disk.

I don't fit your description though. I have two amigas at home and I do use the A500 occasionally.

Cloanto, despite not being the copyright holders are the only party guilty of preventing this 20 odd year old software from being made easily and legally available to those who still wish to obtain it...

They're both obliged to take action (see http://www.amigaforever.com/kb/13-122: "When we receive reports about web sites which are claimed to provide such files, we are obliged by law and by contract to take some action.") and it's sensible course of action to protect their investment.

I can carry on quietly with my original intention of getting to the bottom of all this

Good luck with this endeavour. I hope you'll use less controversial methods in the future though.

[Franko]

@ Dammy

Stick to MooBunny Dammy, at least over there your babblings are a bit more entertaining (not much but a bit)...

That reminds me I'd better nip over and see what insults you've come up with for me today... :lol:

@ Piru

No offence Piru but I don't wish to converse with a humourless android...

[number6]

We have sourced quite a few NOS Workbench 3.1 packages to supply with the Natami.

the ones BBRV got from Petro?

#6

[Markus_Bieler]

Upload the files here so your provider doesn't complain! https://rapidshare.com/

That would be illegal and breaking the GBT of rapidshare.

Markus

[Markus_Bieler]

Do you actively ignore what people are writing?

This is NOT about getting "great Virtual Machine software".
This is about getting legal replacements for Workbench disks suitable for installation on REAL Amigas.
Using Amiga Forever contents for that purpose is illegal according to Cloanto.

What is unclear?

They can write what they want, into their EULA. If they sell AF in Switzerland , then you can make with this CDs and their contents what you want. So you can make as many copies for real Amigas as you happened to own.

Markus

[Markus_Bieler]

I dug this up out of the usenet archives circa 1993. Not legally binding, but I thought it interesting anyway. Check out the bit I have in bold underline and the apparent CBM official posting....

Plaz

Carolyn Scheppner - CATS    Mar 2 1993, 9:54 pm

In article crys...@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Crysta|) writes:
 >Hello,

.....

However, if you have an A1000 and copy a friend's Kickstart because
 yours went bad, I don't think anyone would have a problem with that.


.....

--
 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
   /\/\   /\/\   Carolyn Scheppner - Technical Manager - CATS U.S.
  ( ^^ ) ( -- )  CATS - Commodore Applications and Technical Support
   `--'   `--'   uunet!cbmvax!carolyn caro...@commodore.com BIX:cscheppner

That 100% the way Commodore Switzerland handeled the case of copying Kicks and WB up to Version 2.1. They changed it somewhat with OS3.1, as you had to have the original disk to get  a replacementcopy from the dealer. BUT they never complaint about copying amongst friends.

Markus

[desiv]

I'm not assuming anything. DMCA doesn't cover copying.

It's handled by the Copyright Office.  It involves copying..
I don't see how you don't get this...

Using DeCSS is a DMCA violation even when you are using original DVD's.

True, and when you use DeCSS, you are making a copy from the encrypted version on DVD to an unencrypted version on your hard disk.
It is a copy...  You can't decrypt withOUT copying...
Hence, why the Copyright Office is involved in DMCA...
 

It's no hope as you're purposefully misunderstanding what the act says because you want to win an argument.

And as I have been saying that you are arguing semantics (allowing us both to have valid opinions), I was specifically NOT trying to win the argument..

However, as you can't even understand that, never mind.  It's not semantics..
You're just wrong..  :argue:    :p:p

Relax...

desiv

[persia]

I think the question of whether a EULA is enforceable or not is really still up in the air.  No court on the planet has rule on EULAs in general but rather specific wording in specific EULAs.  It's going to also vary country to country.  I would tend to say that using the ROMs in physical hardware that you own *may* be legal in some countries.

The trouble is that Cloanto could Microsoft a small hobby company, that is overwhelm them with lawyers and make it difficult and expensive to fight and easy to capitulate.

If cars had EULAs they would state the the manufacturer wasn't liable if the breaks failed or the fuel tank exploded, and that you couldn't look inside the engine compartment.  

If a sandwich had a EULA the manufacturer wouldn't be responsible for botulism or random bits of rat, and you can't open your sandwich to take a look at what's on it.

[psxphill]

And as I have been saying that you are arguing semantics (allowing us both to have valid opinions), I was specifically NOT trying to win the argument..

You are entitled to your opinion, but you started arguing with me.
 
While I agree that being involved with the copyright office and the fact copyright is in the name would indicate that it has something to do with copyright, nothing within the act itself has added or removed anything from copyright law.
 
The saying "never judge a book by it's cover" is appropriate.