Subject: Re: Buccaneer Bernie?
Path: lobby!newstf02.news.aol.com!portc04.blue.aol.com!newsfeed.mathworks.com!cyclone.swbell.net!typhoon01.swbell.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
Message-ID: <379A3642.D4DB5EA5@swbell.net>
From: Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>
Reply-To: rubywand@swbell.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.emulators.apple2
References: <379787C9.E374FE61@texas.net>
		 <19990722233242.15879.00000483@ng-fi1.aol.com>
		 <37995E30.94E904FA@swbell.net> <7nc5c0$dav$1@news.imp.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 128
Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 16:55:14 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.193.14.187
X-Complaints-To: abuse@swbell.net
X-Trace: typhoon01.swbell.net 932853301 207.193.14.187 (Sat, 24 Jul 1999 14:55:01 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 14:55:01 PDT
Organization: SBC Internet Services



Henrik Gudat writes ...
 ....
> I see you're on the best way to inflammate this forum. We've been going
> through this before, just in case you forgot.
> 
> We do not promote piracy in any way. We have checked with Apple the ROM
> issue and the way we're dealing with it has been okayed by Apple European
> Licensing in Germany. We have made every effort to make the Bernie
> undertaking a legitimate one by _actively_ attempting to clarify things.
> Apple has been aware of Bernie/Fast Eddie before the public knew about it
> because we told them so. It did not turn out exactly the way we wanted
> (namely being allowed to distribute the ROMs), but we can live with the
> current situation because it also helps Apple. (That's what _they_ say not
> what we're assuming.)
> It is not illegal to copy the ROM if you own an original machine.
> 
> We have asked Apple. Your plan is to wait until someone complains. Since
> this nuance is what I'd describe as "ethics", I'm returning my pirate's
> badge.
> 
> It is ridiculous to state that piracy is an inherent ingredient of Bernie.
> You can break laws with almost every software. It is always in the user's
> own responsibility to honor the law. We're fulfilling our part by reminding
> our customers of the dos and donts.
> 
> Saying .img support is promoting piracy is possibly qualifying for
> rec.humor.funny. You obviously don't have a thorough understanding of our
> customer base. If your statement is that Bernie users are pirates, please
> confirm and I will pass this on.
 ....

     Quite a collection of distortions or, possibly, misunderstandings.

     You began this thread with an attack on a Csa2 member who offers to supply
getting started software, free, to new users. The implication of your remark

>>
You mean these people not involved in mass-distributing current commercial
software?
<<

is clear. You are saying that the person offering the software is some kind of
pirate whereas You are above such things.


     My observations have merely demonstrated that the archives, those who
upload/download at the archives, and you are 'in the same boat'. You all (we
all) engage in copyright infringement. It is virtually impossible not to.

     You say ...

>>
Apple has been aware of Bernie/Fast Eddie before the public knew about it
because we told them so. It did not turn out exactly the way we wanted
(namely being allowed to distribute the ROMs), but we can live with the
current situation because it also helps Apple. (That's what _they_ say not
what we're assuming.) 
<<

     This is a classic example of a copyright owner permitting copyright
infringement. That is, Apple will not grant you rights to the ROM; but, Apple
will not move against you or sites which offer copies of their IIgs ROMs
either. Why? Because it is in Apple's interests to not interfer.

     Selling some new game or utility disk which includes ProDOS is copyright
infringement, too. Apple does not license ProDOS; yet, if you contact an Apple
rep, you will be told, 'off the record', that Apple probably will not do
anything.

     You say that a IIgs user has the 'right' to transfer IIgs ROM code for use
on a Mac. Such an exception to normal copyright practice would need to be
stated explicitly by Apple. Where is this official statement?

     Your docs go through an explanation of how to transfer IIgs ROM code from
the IIgs. Then, you say this ...

>>
If, for some reason, you are unable to make a ROM dump yourself, you can obtain
copies from the web: http://www.emulation.net/apple2
<<

You could easily offer the ROM code files on your site. Why do you refer your
users to a third party site? 

     Indeed, your directions for transferring IIgs ROM code from a IIgs should
be easy enough for anyone to follow. If you are so concerned about "piracy",
why take the chance of referring anyone to a site which offers the ROM code
(and, incidently, infringes on Apple copyrights)?  You must realize that
thousands of non-IIgs owners will download the ROM code to use with your
product.

     The truth is that many PC-owning XGS users have never owned a IIgs and
would't know one from a PlayStation. The same is likely to be true of many,
possibly most, Mac Bernie users. As you very well know, the IIgs ROM code
_must_ be made available for download because, otherwise, there would be no way
for many Mac users to obtain it and your sales would suffer.


     Regarding disk images: Mac has a good IIgs disk image format called
"diskcopy". And, Richard B has created a shareware utility to create diskcopy
images. A Mac user converting his/her software collection for Bernie should
have no "compatibility" problems at all using diskcopy images.

     There is only one reason to recommend adopting the XGS .2MG format. You
want your users to understand that they can download games and other old
commercial wares from XGS .2MG sites like IIgs Gaming Memory Fairway. This
greatly increases the attractiveness of Bernie and you can sell more of your
product.

     Basically, everything about your product and its presentation encourages
copyright infringement. You know it; Apple knows it; and everyone else knows
it.

     Again, since the concept seems to have eluded you, copyright infringement
is _not_ software piracy.

     No one-- except, possibly, you-- has accused you of piracy. (The tradition
behind the "Real Pirate's Badge" is well established-- it only goes to someone
who is _not_ a software pirate.)

     Your chief disagreement is not with Rubywand. It is with your self. You so
love to adopt a holier than thou position which condemns others for copyright
infringement. But, when it comes to _your_ product and _your_ pocketbook, the
rules magically vanish.



Rubywand