19-Apr-2024 01:42 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 164 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 164]
[News] Serious allegations about H&PANN.lu
Posted on 08-Nov-2001 14:17 GMT by Christian Kemp164 comments
View flat
View list
Amigo follows up on serious allegations about H&P and says: "I also just asked Unisys as it says here, and am waiting for a reply. If true, H&P could probably be forced to close." [ If H&P indeed didn't pay royalties for Unisys' GIF algorithm, they might not be forced to close per se, but if this is indeed true, and Unisys decides to sue, they might have to pay some serious fines. Also note that while this is not in unmoderated, it's highly speculative, unconfirmed and generally should be taken with the usual grain of salt - CK ]
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 1 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 08-Nov-2001 13:25 GMT
What are you on about?
1) Where does H&P come into the equation
2) Cloanto have licenced the GIF/LZW algorithm
Why didn't you wait for a reply before posting? Are you just stirring up trouble?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 2 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 08-Nov-2001 13:37 GMT
Right, it is the bottom two comments of the article in question (please mention this in the article, or cut-and-paste the relevant text next time please).
1) The GIF issue is with LZW compressed GIFs only.
2) This is because of a software patent (only enforceable in USA, not Europe)
3) GIF royalty fee is about $5000.
4) We should all use PNG anyway
So it depends on the status of the GIF datatype in H&Ps code. If it is licenced from someone else who has a license, then it is probably OK. Also depends on when the datatype was written, as Unisys were not charging fees until 1997 I believe. Earlier code would by definition be exempt. Whether or not this means that the code should be removed from OS3.5 and 3.9 I cannot comment on.
Still, I think you should have waited until you received a reply before posting it. Or contacted H&P directly and got a comment from them as well.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 3 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 13:50 GMT
Yes! we have a winner in the creepy sneak category!
What benefit is this stirring up trouble?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 4 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 14:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (Graham):
Read the article on Cloanto.com, it is well-written, even if long. Also read the page from Unisys listed in that post, it specifically mentions European patents.
Just to clarify:
- You cannot inherit a license like this, you must be licensed yourself with Unisys. If one is in doubt, emailing Unisys is sufficient, AFAIK they answer quickly and professionally.
- Even if developed before Unisys started asking for a license, GIF/TIFF/LZW code still must be licensed.
- This also applies to freely downloadable code.
- Unisys also has valid and unsuccessfully-challenged patents in Europe, not only in the USA.
- Unisys is known to go into very tough litigations about these issues, they already forced a company who tried to ignore this to almost close down, I don't remember the name, it was the publisher of a graphics package for Windows.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 5 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 08-Nov-2001 14:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Anonymous):
> What benefit is this stirring up trouble?
Stirring up trouble or not, once such a thing has been covered up and discussed somewhere, there's little use hiding it anymore, and it's better to discuss it openly and possibly see an official correction, rather than the entire issue being ignored and doubts persisting forever.
Besides, it's kinda ironic, weren't H&P advocating a strict no-piracy policy, but yet they *allegedly* did not licence the GIF writing algorithm for ArtEffect.
I am neither a lawyer, nor an expert of patent laws, of course, so I might be wrong.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 6 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 08-Nov-2001 14:13 GMT
Does Amiga Inc. hold a GIF license? They would surely be the ones who published Amiga OS 3.9 (3.5) and thus are liable for licensing stuff in these products.
If ArtEffect uses Datatypes (I don't know about Arteffect, so I may be wrong) then it would depends on the licensing issues for AmigaOS I believe.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 7 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 08-Nov-2001 14:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Graham):
I'm not sure, but I thought there was no licence fee due for freeware GIF readers. While the AmigaOS 3.5/3.9 datatypes were not free, at least they didn't write GIFs, which IIRC required that expensive licence from Unisys.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 8 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 08-Nov-2001 14:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Christian Kemp):
> Besides, it's kinda ironic, weren't H&P advocating a strict no-piracy policy,
> but yet they *allegedly* did not licence the GIF writing algorithm for
> ArtEffect.
It's indeed ironic. After the AmiTCP problem with "OS" 3.9, Juergen Haage agreed by private e-mail that he "did not know" and was "very sorry" and wanted to "find a solution". There were then attempts to try to find a solution but it didn't work out.
Case closed? No. One year later, H&P does it *again* and distributes AmiTCP *yet again* with their Amiga"OS" XL package.
I consider this as morally inacceptable and a serious insult against the developers of AmiTCP.
--
David Gerber (current maintainer of AmiTCP)
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 9 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 14:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Christian Kemp):
A license is also required on freeware software developed before Unisys became aware of this, or at least this is what they said. Cloanto also tried to stick to the pre-1995 code, but it did not work, and they had to license it. Also, Unisys insists that the patent also applies to READING GIFs, not just writing them. So far nobody successfully challenged on that, AFAIK.
Now if you look at some internet pages (I did a quick "arteffect+gif" search on Google), it is clear that ArtEffect was not limited to using DataTypes, but supported GIF internally:
ArtEffect 1.5 could load GIF:
http://www.pwr.wroc.pl/AMIGA/AR/ar503_Sections/review10.html
ArtEffect 2.0 could load and save GIF:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=132164072%40p2.f275.n5020.z2.fidonet.ftn&output=gplain
ArtEffect 3.0 could load and save GIF:
http://www.amigascene.com/english/0x011C.html
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 10 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 08-Nov-2001 15:09 GMT
Oh f*ck.
It is not enough that these are difficult times for the community, because of the pressure from WIntel world, OUR OWN DOGS BITE as well.
Old means are better than any modern medicine, better just kill those rabid dogs!
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 11 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Jens Schönfeld on 08-Nov-2001 15:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (David Gerber):
Hi,
since I am working on a part of AmiTCP with Haage (especialy the appp.device), could you please explain the issues on AmiTCP? I seem to either have missed something here, or the problems have been discussed behind closed doors. If so, a private eMail is OK, I just need the information, because I do not want to take part in a copyright violation.
Jens Schönfeld / individual Computers
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 12 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by David Gerber on 08-Nov-2001 15:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Jens Schönfeld):
Explanation sent by e-mail.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 13 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 16:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (David Gerber):
Hehe, Jens while your at it, ask your H&P bosses about the licenses reguarding reaction (class act).
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 14 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Michael Taylor on 08-Nov-2001 17:34 GMT
Blah, Blah... Now, onto something more important..
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 15 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 08-Nov-2001 18:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (anonymous):
>Hehe, Jens while your at it, ask your H&P bosses about the licenses reguarding
>reaction (class act).
I don't understand why people here give this ANONYMOUS poster ANY credibility! This is the same troll that attakcs Amiga Inc, H&P and anything else associated with OS4.0/AmigaOne.
Personally, I would never trust someone who's scared to reveal his identity. This poster obviously has an agenda and that is to hurt Amiga Inc and H&P. If you don't like H&P, then don't buy H&P products. If you don't like Amiga Inc, then don't buy Amiga Inc products. There's no reason to sit here and smear people and companies!
The facts are that legal disputes between companies happen all the time. Big deal. Commodore didn't pay royalties on some of it's patent infringments, and there were companies that infringed on C='s patents that never got sued. No one is on the moral high-ground, it's just a part of doing business.
I think it's time for some people to grow up!
- Mike
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 16 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 08-Nov-2001 19:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Mike Veroukis):
Amen, and besides IIRC there were later revisions of GIF handling code that did not
infringe on the patents, and there was some reason or "amnesty" for use of GIF loader/saver
routines ( especially for web browser technologies ) prior to the patent transferring as it
had not been enforced. Its a little hazy in my mind but to single out H+P for this is
ridiculous in the extreme.
Sounds almost like a "revenge attack" for the "OS3.1 sources were used in the making of your OS" claim.
Dave.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 17 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 08-Nov-2001 19:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 16 (Dave):
I agree.
This whole licensing issue was some bright idea of somebody over at Unisys to extract money out of everybody using GIF's etc. on websites.
It caused quite row at the time and Unisys was forced to back down on the issue to a large degree.
Take a look here:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/6523.html
Reminds of the brilliant idea of somebody at British Telecom who discovered that British Telecom had supposedly patented the principle of the "hyperlink".
Some ISP's in the States actually paid BT off but most people just laughed their asses off.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 18 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 08-Nov-2001 19:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Especially with Tim B-L on his bio page has a biliography about hypertext as long as your
arm - dating back to the 40s/50s in some cases.
They might as well claim that hitting the action key in a psuedoconversational 3270 interaction
would come under it. That would be funny, puny BT trying to get one over IBM. Im sure IBM would
come up with a list of patent infringements as long as your arm ( including the mouse pointer icon
in context one ) that would put anyone off - and thats the reason these companies amass patents.
With all the childish baiting that has gone on recently I wonder why you are all still bothering with the
"Amiga" marketplace. Must be "love" because it sure as hell aint "money".
Kudos,
Dave ( who is guilty of patenting anything he can think of )
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 19 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 19:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Mike Veroukis):
It's well known, for over a years time, that these issues existed, if you would rather attack me and posting anonymously that's fine (take it up with the maintainer of this discussion forum), of course that doesn't deal with the content of the post, and it's accuracy does it?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 20 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 20:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Mike Veroukis):
> I don't understand why people here give this
> ANONYMOUS poster ANY credibility!
Why do you think that in democracy people vote anonymously?
Because it makes them free to say what they think. Otherwsie this freedom would not always be possible. If you do not trust something, then verify it. In this case there are numerous and clear allegations (GIF, TCP/IP, Star Trek, Reaction, SIAE licenses, at least a couple more MPEGs from major companies, etc.) If everybody confirms that these items are unlicensed, and H&P just keeps saying they didn't know, they didn't need, etc., I think we can see a pattern here, and judge accordingly.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 21 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 08-Nov-2001 20:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (anonymous):
Name yourself first, then we might actually start to believe your claims. Hiding behind anonymity is not going to lend a general air of validity to your claims, and there is no reason for you to hide in this case.
Until you put a name to your comments and accusations, your comments are worthless and invalid in my eyes.
Christian, can you look at this guy's IP address and find out where he is from? No need to tell us what it is, just whether it is the same ISP as other anti-Amiga/etc posts on this forum.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 22 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 08-Nov-2001 20:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Anonymous):
People vote anonymously in a democracy so that people need not worry that their voting choices will count against them afterwards, or used against them in any way. It is safety for the voter. The voter is not posting libelous/slanderous material on a public website behind an anonymous proxy.
All we have is your word on this. And you are not willing to back your word up with your name. So you are just stirring up trouble against H&P, possibly on some private vendetta. If you really had a point, you would ask H&P for information, and you would ask the other parties involved as well. You would not just come here and spout off your theories as the truth.
Did you know that even anonymous proxy providers will give up the logs upon a court order?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 23 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 08-Nov-2001 20:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Anonymous):
That story is very boring and completey baseless.
H&P had a valid agreement with Chris Wiles and they acted in good faith.
The fact that the agreement between Chris Wiles was supposedly subsequently "terminated" by the authors of AmiTCP does not alter that assessment.
You think you can just "terminate" agreements like that?
At the very least you would have to have a contractual provision which would allow you to terminate the agreement in the event of non-performance.
You're barking up the wrong tree.
First of all, you should turn against Chris Wiles if you feel he wronged you.
Secondly, why don't you sue H&P then if you think you are right?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 24 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 08-Nov-2001 21:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Graham):
>All we have is your word on this. And you are not willing to back your word up
>with your name. So you are just stirring up trouble against H&P, possibly on
>some private vendetta.
Although he/she is quite protective with his name, she/he is very willing to name other people's names.
And this is mostly addressed to Mr. Anonymous:
As for the voting analogy, it's not a very good analogy. We're not voting here are we? However, let's look at it more from a legal point of view. Does not one have the right to know his accusers? I think they do. You accuse H&P of committing illegal acts. I think they have the right to know who you are. And if you're gonna make these accusations in public, so does the public!
- Mike
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 25 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 21:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Graham):
> All we have is your word on this. And you are not
> willing to back your word up with your name.
If somebody gives you facts which can easily be verified, why is that not enough for you? I did my homework.
> So you are just stirring up trouble against H&P
> possibly on some private vendetta.
True, I consider myself one of the "victims" of H&P. Only, suing them is too expensive. I don't have the money. Do you? But I am just saying the truth, and you can verify it.
> If you really had a point, you would ask H&P for information
> and you would ask the other parties involved as well.
I cerainly did, before speaking. Both directly, at trade shows, and indirectly, asking the other parties involved.
> You would not just come here and spout off your theories as the truth.
So far I have not see a bit of evidence of the contrary. But ArtEffect and AmigaOS XL are solid evidence for me. I know what is contained on those products.
> Did you know that even anonymous proxy providers
> will give up the logs upon a court order?
No problem. I am not the one who should fear. I am just wondering why you seem to be more interested in knowing who these anonymous posters are, than if what they say is true. I asked Unisys, why don't you?
Look, just to do something new... There are two videos and lots of images from movies on AmigaXL, just to mention one recent H&P product:
Charlie's Angels - (c) Columbia TriStar Interactive
Monsters - (c) Buena Vista International, Inc.
Star Trek - (c) Paramount Pictures Corporation
Yet there is no copyright information on that CD. I am pretty sure, as in their usual style, H&P did not even ask, they just grabbed these items and put them on CD. Otherwise some legal notice would be on the CD. I cannot verify everything, so would you like to help me, and contact these companies?
BTW I see that several people seem to use the same IP. I guess it is everybody who uses anonymizer.com. I only wrote two or three posts.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 26 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Amifan on 08-Nov-2001 21:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (Anonymous):
THe question is: Do they add any walue to OS3.9? In other words, is H&P making money with those trailers?? Well guess not....
So I don't think that Virgin Lucas or any other would mind an additional spread of their trailers and you know that. But hey, you got to come with something to attack H&P...
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 27 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 21:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
> I'm not sure, but I thought there was no
> licence fee due for freeware GIF readers.
That's true in part: a fee/royalty was not always required, but a license was always required.
> No one is on the moral high-ground,
> it's just a part of doing business.
I guess there are many and very different ways of "doing business" then. If you approve of all of them, and you can sleep well at night, then I guess I envy you.
> there were later revisions of GIF handling
> code that did not infringe on the patents
Sure, uncompressed GIF. But nobody uses that.
> This whole licensing issue was some bright
> idea of somebody over at Unisys to extract
> money out of everybody using GIF's etc. on websites.
That's an urban legend. The license is for software, not for GIF _files_ on web sites.
> The fact that the agreement between Chris Wiles was
> supposedly subsequently "terminated" by the authors
> of AmiTCP does not alter that assessment.
So why did David just write that Juergen Haage "agreed by private e-mail that he "did not know" and was "very sorry" and wanted to "find a solution"?
> You're barking up the wrong tree.
May I remind you that this is the tree I and others are barking at:
http://www.amiga-planet.de/nopiracy/
nopiracy@haage-partner.com
Amiga "No Piracy" Campaign
"provided by H&P"
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 28 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 08-Nov-2001 21:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (Anonymous):
>If somebody gives you facts which can easily be verified, why is that not
>enough for you? I did my homework.
If these are indeed "facts" that can been easily verified as you say, then there is no reason to hide your name is it? What harm could come from speaking the truth? Set yourself free, tell us your name!
- Mike
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 29 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 21:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (Mike Veroukis):
> If these are indeed "facts" that can been easily verified
> as you say, then there is no reason to hide your name is it
Is it so difficult to understand that somebody may fear retaliation for saying the truth, especially if retaliation has already been suffered in the past?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 30 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 08-Nov-2001 21:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (Anonymous):
>Yet there is no copyright information on that CD. I am pretty sure, as in
>their usual style, H&P did not even ask, they just grabbed these items and put
>them on CD. Otherwise some legal notice would be on the CD. I cannot verify
>everything, so would you like to help me, and contact these companies?
So let me ask you... Did you buy H&P CD? I find it interesting that someone who hates H&P so much would be so intimate with what's on that CD-ROM. Very interesting indeed.
I would also like to point out that copyright law does not fall under the criminal code but cival law. This means that it is up to the companies in question to take whatever action they feel like (or turn a blind eye). There's no reason for anyone else to get invloved. After all, these trailers are in effect FREE ADVERTISEMENT!!!! You can get them FREELY from their web site. Also, if you happened to watch any trailer the copyright notice (along with a rating warning and a release date) is included in the trailer itself! So what do I think? I think you're a loser nerd who desperatly needs to get laid! Good luck!
- Mike
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 31 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 08-Nov-2001 21:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Anonymous):
You should post with your name... I do not blame you, if you do not
want to
but I've posted much worse stuff with my name on them....
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 32 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Just my two cents on 08-Nov-2001 21:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (Amifan):
> THe question is: Do they add any walue to OS3.9?
> In other words, is H&P making money with those trailers??
Money or not, piracy is piracy. Especially when you self-proclaim yourself as the major Amiga anti-piracy activist (H&P runs www.amiga-planet.de/nopiracy/).
But if there was no profit, direct or indirect, why did they take what we now added to a list of about 8-10 things people are complaining about, and who knows what else, all without doing it the proper way, i.e. asking and licensing and respecting the law? Are they the new Robin Hood? Are companies like Clonato evil now, because they licensed GIF? I have Amiga Forever here. I will now carefully see what's on the CD, if it is licensed or not. Actually, I will ask Unisys if they have a license for GIF, just to begin with. I want to see clear in this as much too do I think.
Another thing. I think we can all make mistakes. But how we react to these is also one way of how we show who we are. If it is true what the post said about Haage selling and giving out for free Amiga XL at the Pianeta show, and not stopping after they were informed of how it works in Italy, and if it is true that they said that TCP/IP in 3.9 was a mistake, yet they then published it again on XL, and if it is true that on their web site H&P say the GIF royalty exists but it is a "problem", and they blatantly ignore the patent and publish GIF software, than I think this says something about both the company and the people behind it.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 33 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Emmanuel Lesueur on 08-Nov-2001 21:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Ben Hermans writes:
> H&P had a valid agreement with Chris Wiles and they acted in good
> faith.
There was good faith at the beginning. As soon as they *know* they
have no rights to distribute AmiTCP and they continue to do it,
there is no longer good faith.
> The fact that the agreement between Chris Wiles was supposedly
> subsequently "terminated" by the authors of AmiTCP does not alter
> that assessment.
Stop being ridiculous please. There is no need to terminate any
agrement to make this transaction invalid.
The AmiTCP copyright holders gave Chris Wiles the right to
distribute AmiTCP with Genesis. This does not give him any right
to transmit this distribution right to anyone. A distribution
right can only be obtained from the copyright holder, it can
not be transmited.
Whether Chris Wiles acted in good faith when he sold Genesis
to H&P, I don't know. Whether H&P thought in good faith to have
bought AmiTCP, probably. But the fact is that they don't have
its rights, that the deal is invalid, and thus that it is
illegal for them to distribute AmiTCP. And still they continue
distributing it knowingly. Whether or not they have been
wronged by Chris Wiles doesn't change the fact that they are
wrong too.
If I sell you the rights to Windows XP, you start selling it all
over the world, and MS tells you to stop, do you think you can
get away by telling you got the rights from me and thus can
go on your sales? Get real.
But you do know all this. You're supposed to be a lawyer, right?
> Secondly, why don't you sue H&P then if you think you are right?
I can't speak for the copyright holders here, but I guess the only
question is: is it worth the trouble? There is no doubt about the
issue if they were to sue.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 34 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Nov-2001 21:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Mike Veroukis):
> Also, if you happened to watch any trailer the copyright
> notice (along with a rating warning and a release date)
> is included in the trailer itself!
Exactly, and the copyright notice is there to say the trailers cannot be copied without permission.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 35 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 08-Nov-2001 21:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Anonymous):
>Exactly, and the copyright notice is there to say the trailers cannot be
>copied without permission.
For your info, a copyright notice does not mean you can't copy. That's what licenses are for. Everything ever writen is automatically copyrighted, the copyright notice just states who owns the copyright and when it was created (that's due to the fact that copyrights expire after time). This message is therefore automatically copyrighted, so are you then breaking the law when you quote me when replying? Did you have writen permission from me or from ann.lu to copy the previous messages? It's starting to get rather silly isn't it?
Also, how do you know they did not have permission for these trailers, or that these trailers were not free to ditribute? You don't, you're just making a big stink about something even the most anal lawyer would not give more then a second of his time too. You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel.
If H&P screwed you, it sucks to be you. Sue them if you feel you're in the right. Everyone can afford to sue, just find a lawyer that believes in your case and will only take a percentage of what you win in court. Otherwise, shut up and get over it. You're really annoying.
- Mike
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 36 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 08-Nov-2001 21:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Anonymous):
So how do you know that H&P didn't get permission to include them?
Prove it.
As with all things, innocent before proven guilty, and all you are giving is words and conjecture.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 37 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Another two cents on 08-Nov-2001 22:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Mike Veroukis):
> This message is therefore automatically copyrighted, so are
> you then breaking the law when you quote me when replying?
When you post to a public forum you implicitly acconsent to this system of quotes and replies.
> Also, how do you know they did not have permission for these trailers,
Normally when you use something under license you say so on the distribution medium.
> or that these trailers were not free to distribute?
On the official movie sites where the trailers are, it says you can't redistribute them.
> Everyone can afford to sue, just find a lawyer that believes
> in your case and will only take a percentage of what you win
> in court.
What you say is illegal in most of Europe. Lawyers cannot get percentages if they win, and nothing if they don't.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 38 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Mr. Copyright on 08-Nov-2001 22:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (Mike Veroukis):
> For your info, a copyright notice does
> not mean you can't copy.
The notice no, the law yes, so the result is the same. A copyright notice means that copyright law applies. Copyright law, in simple words, says you cannot copy without permission.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 39 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 08-Nov-2001 22:57 GMT
Regarding the AmiTCP/Genesis situation, it's not necessary so simple,
although it probably is quite simple.
Now, if Haage&Partner really did do what could be expected of them to
check that they had the copyrights for Genesis including AmiTCP/IP,
and if Chris Wiles really told them that they got these rights, and
they had good reason to believe him, they might have a case.
However.
I quote from the docs in the Aminet archive of Genesis demo:
»AmiTCP Kernel & Components © 1991-99 Network Solutions
Development Inc«
Did Chris Wiles remove this information when he sold Genesis to H&P?
If so, Wiles might be the person to blame. But I doubt he did. Does
H&P have any kind of evidence that Wiles told them he sold them the
right to a complete TCP/IP stack, including AmiTCP?
If H&P would try to plead ignorance, here's a quote from their
homepage:
"GENESIS is a complete TCP/IP stack (based on AmiTCP) which can
also be used for professional Intranet connections."
Now if it's based on AmiTCP, why didn't they check that they had the
rights to AmiTCP? Didn't they even read the copyright section of the
software they bought? I don't think a court would find that they did
what could reasonably be expected if they didn't.
And in any case, whatever a court might rule, there's no excuse for
treating developers this badly. There are quite a few loopholes I
could use to pirate H&P software quite legally, I guess that's "Fair
game" if we're supposed to accept H&P's standards (and Hyperion's, it
now appears).
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 40 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Jack Perry on 09-Nov-2001 00:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Anonymous):
First: Actually, there is something called "fair use" which means one CAN copy significant portions of a copyrighted document without permission. That wouldn't apply to how H&P uses TCP/IP (not saying they've broken the law either) but it could well apply to movie trailers on the CD. (I don't know; I'm not a lawyer, but I haven't seen anyone mention this.)
Second: a lot of disputers here are saying, "IF H&P did this, AND IF H&P did this, AND IF H&P did this..." etc. There's a serious flaw with this sort of argumentation: namely, you have proved NOTHING AT ALL unless you DO IN FACT KNOW that H&P DID do this, AND H&P DID do this, AND H&P DID do this...
It might be useful to remember that many false criminal convictions are based on such evidence. With freedom of speech come a certain responsibility to oneself and to others. You may deceive others, and you may even deceive yourself, but irresponsible, impassionate speech still makes you rotten to your core.
3. The no-piracy campaign is a good thing, regardless of whether H&P itself is immaculate in this regard. (I am not so convinced they are, either.)
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 41 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Jeremy Taylor on 09-Nov-2001 00:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (Jack Perry):
> a lot of disputers here are saying, "IF H&P did this, AND
> IF H&P did this, AND IF H&P did this..." etc. There's a
> serious flaw with this sort of argumentation: namely,
> you have proved NOTHING AT ALL unless you DO IN FACT
> KNOW that H&P DID do this...
True. Apparently some people think they know, but why not go
straight to the source, and ask Haage & Partner? Mr. Haage,
where are you, why do you often answer so quickly, but you
are so quiet today?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 42 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Ville Sarell on 09-Nov-2001 00:39 GMT
Hmm..this is getting ridicilous.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 43 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 09-Nov-2001 00:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Emmanuel Lesueur):
>But you do know all this. You're supposed to be a lawyer, right?
>
Hey, what do you expect from a "D" grade hedge lawyer, heh... :-P
Serious now, a lot of politicians are/were lawyers but that does
not make them any trustworthier or sticking to the truth, does it?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 44 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by janne on 09-Nov-2001 01:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Johan Rönnblom):
AmiTCP is based on a (what's now called) Open source (well BSD?) TCP/IP Stack, who say's
he who orginally made AmiTCP that he had the right to close-source it again?
(not saying that it was open-source but...)
have the orginal author of AmiTCP actually expressed any interest in developing it
further? he sure is quiet for someone that apparently has been shafted, why hasn't he
sued H&P then, cuuld it be because he doesn't have a case?.
regarding the GIF dispute... if it's the cloanto gif.datatype this is not a violation
of the unisys license since it stated (when the gif.datatype was released) that
public domain versions did not require a license and the cloanto gif.datatype was released
as a public domain addidition (I think the personal_gif_io.library was stated as being licensed)
has vapor paid Unisys the license for using GIF/LZW code in their imagedecoders?
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 45 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 09-Nov-2001 01:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (janne):
> if it's the cloanto gif.datatype this is not a violation
> of the unisys license since it stated (when the gif.datatype
> was released) that public domain versions did not require a
> license and the cloanto gif.datatype was released
> as a public domain addidition (I think the
> personal_gif_io.library was stated as being licensed)
Cloanto did not do that, and Unisys never stated that as
far as it was concerned public domain versions would be
license-free, especially as it became obvious that
companies were trying to separate their GIF code and
make it available for free download, but to the benefit
of some other software they were selling, in an attempt
to escape the Unisys license/royalty. But Cloanto never
did this. Cloanto itself always only used the DataType and the
I/O library on CDs and online distributions for which it paid
royalties to Unisys, e.g. Personal Suite, Personal Paint,
Amiga Forever, etc. Cloanto never distributed any GIF/LZW
code outside of these licensed contexts, not even for free
download on Aminet. On Aminet you will find a statement by
Cloanto about GIF/LZW, but not a GIF/LZW file uploaded by
Cloanto. Aminet does not even accept GIF/LZW code.
It is however true that Cloanto gave up its rights to its personal_gif_io.library, making it public domain _as far as
Cloanto was concerned_. What Cloanto made possible was for
somebody to take its GIF library and use it without being
sued by Cloanto, but not without being sued by Unisys or
possibly others, if they had valid patents in the region
in which the distribution occurred. Cloanto never directly
or indirectly profited from this, or reduced the royalties
it had to pay, it simply said it would not sue. And it kept
paying royalties for the copies of its software which it
sold. It never said "take my software without GIF, and then
download the free GIF add-on", which would have effectively
been a circumvention of the patent license.
Cloanto also developed a GIF DataType, but I don't think
it ever distributed it other than on its own products,
and certainly not after the problems related to GIF
emerged. Even if you took the DataType by Cloanto from
a Cloanto package, and assuming Cloanto let you do this,
you would still have to deal with Unisys however. There
is no way known to me to escape the Unisys issue until
the patent expires, which will be in a few years.
I think you are confusing with the Cloanto PNG DataType,
which indeed Cloanto distributed for free.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 46 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 09-Nov-2001 02:15 GMT
Heh...purification of Amiga businesses? Might be something to pop some popcorn for. ;)
I guess by the time the inevitable Amiga challenge to the world's dominating operating system comes, it will be well-trained and have muscles from all the previous battle scars--and shall stand on a foundation of truth. Immoveable. Impervious. And shall, thusly, begin to lay waste the corruptions before it.
--EyeAm (a sword of truth)
http://www.ElectricOil.com
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 47 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by amorel on 09-Nov-2001 02:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Graham):
So if I say 1+1=2 anonymously it`s not true? :-)
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 48 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by m0ns00n on 09-Nov-2001 06:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (amorel):
I thik it is pretty obvious that the defenders of the Amiga crown have a serious thinking problem. It's like if you were talking to the flat-earth society. They won't believe you when you say the earth is round, and if you want to show it to them, they will quarral their way out of it.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 49 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Christoffer A. on 09-Nov-2001 06:35 GMT
I just don't get it. Some people in this community simply have to have their heads stuck up their arses and enough bitterness to fill a few oiltakers.
Let's see. AFAIK PD image decoders do not need a license? Well, just drop all internal support for imagetypes that require licenses and include PD datatypes. IMHO the Warp datatypes should've been included with OS3.9 anyway.
Just get his crap of "our" websites, do it the right way, contact the guilty parties and come back to these sites when you've got some real news to report. Please.
...my 2 swedish öre's ;)
Best regards
Christoffer A.
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 50 of 164ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 09-Nov-2001 06:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 49 (Christoffer A.):
Sorry, no can do. Too many with a mental age of 12 and a chip on the shoulder running
around this forum for that being possible.
Responsible posting went out of fashion the day the kiddos learnt how to connect daddys
modem up to the phone line and use Microsoft Comic Chat.
Forums like this used to be founded on an AUP - but I dont see the only similar
AUP ( point one in the comment guidelines ) being enforced.
I seriously think this should have been left in the unmoderated section. Its not
as if a lawsuit has been taken out, its yet another allegation of wrongdoing and those
waffling on about it consider themselves judge and jury.
Im sure if someone examined everyones business on here under a microscope not one
of us would come up "clean".
Plus, people have got it in for H+P /over/ their anti-piracy stance in the same way they
had it in for Kruse. Its called being a sad [censored] with no life.
Dave.
Anonymous, there are 164 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 164]
Back to Top