23-Apr-2024 15:33 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 221 items in your selection (but only 71 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 221]
[News] "Berniethlon" - The EndANN.lu
Posted on 01-Dec-2002 18:46 GMT by Gareth Knight (Edited on 2002-12-01 21:44:11 GMT by Christian Kemp)221 comments
View flat
View list

"It saddens me greatly to announce that, effective today, any of my Amiga-related software development has been mothballed indefinitely. This means that, pending any unexpected developments, there won't be any "Amithlon v2" (aka "Berniethlon"), nor any further support or add ons for "Amithlon v1" by me."
Read more at the Amithlon site

"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 151 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Steffen Haeuser on 02-Dec-2002 09:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 146 (Don Cox):
Hi!
>IMO some software fits one concept, other software fits the other.
Agreed. And it is *his decision* how he sees his work.
>One thing I have noticed is that those who most complain about the restrictions
>around the GPL are the ones who want to appropriate free software for their own
> profit. It's the "it's not free because I can't make it mine" syndrome.
Please note the GPL in no way forbids selling Software done using the GPL. Actually this is done by MANY MANY companies, including everyone who makes a Linux-Distribution. There is nothing immoral and certainly nothing illegal about it.
Steffen Haeuser
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 152 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Per Larsson on 02-Dec-2002 09:46 GMT
In reply to Comment 150 (Steffen Haeuser):
No, the GNU GPL FAQ is not a legal document. It is merely a helper to those who has read the GNU GPL and did not understand it.
When you are talking about the freedom of selling and distributing your programs without the source, you are at the same time "taking away" the freedom of your users. Had you licensed your programs under the GNU GPL, your users would have the freedom to modify and redistribute your software, without you losing the copyright of your works. The whole point of the GNU GPL, as opposed to a BSD'ish license, is that the program is supposed to stay free once it has been released that way.
The GNU GPL does not take away anyones freedoms. It merely grants excessive rights to the Copyright Laws that every country already has in place.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 153 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Per Larsson on 02-Dec-2002 09:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 152 (Per Larsson):
(Great, now I'm replying to my self. :)
Of course, I should not have used the word "excessive". The word I was supposed to write was "extra".
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 154 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by amorel on 02-Dec-2002 10:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (T_Bone):
"Posted by Anonymous (Unknown IP) on "
Did some scripts go zrazy or what? :-)
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 155 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Dec-2002 10:05 GMT
Surprise, surprise.
Yet another vapourware announcement from Bill & co fails to materialise.
So what happened to all this Legal Action that Bill & co were going to take, hmm?
You know, suing everyone who was "stealing" their IP and so forth. Surely, if things are the way they claim, they have an excellent case against H&P.
Or is this merely, as is more likely the case, just more of Bill's bullshit and there never was going to be any legal action even though it would "save" Amithlon2?
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 156 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Dec-2002 10:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 150 (Steffen Haeuser):
@Steffen,
First, let me state that my own opinion is that there is a place for both proprietary and non-proprietary software in the market. I don't find proprietary software unethical, nor do I find the FSF's philosophy offensive.
> Ah, I see. But then I don't see an "ethic" problem about proprietary
> software either. After all it's the decision of the person who writes
> the software. Making claims about his moral standards based on if he
> writes propietary software or not, THAT I call ethically tainted :)
> If you don't like it - don't use the software. But don't call it
> "ethically tainted". On the other hand I see a clear ethic problem
> with dictating people how they should release their software (to not
> be "ethically tainted").
<snip>
> Also it is a clearly subjective statement, and should NOT be in a legal
> document (and I consider the GPL a legal document, and I guess the same
> applies to the GPL FAQ). If they think it is not subjective, then they
> at least need to include clear proof. If they cannot provide proof they
> should simply remove it.
Let's get a few things straight: the GPL can be considered a legal document, but the FAQ is not. The latter merely clarifies the FSF's interpretation of the GPL and since they commissioned it for their own puproses, it represents the "spirit" of the GPL.
Now, you may feel offended by the philosophy of the FSF, but you cannot challenge their right to hold to that philosophy, nor can you deny them the right to say whatever they like according to that philosophy.
> They can have their opinions without including such stuff in their
> official documents (and maybe annoying other people).
Why should they care if you're annoyed by their stance or not? Do you think they're bothered that Microsoft are much more than "annoyed" about it?
Let's face it, if you find the stance of the FSF offensive, you could protest by not using their software or software released under their license, either as a developer or end user. That would be what is commonly called "putting your money where your mouth is", but I expect that would cause you some difficulties in your current position. *grin*
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 157 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Daniel Miller on 02-Dec-2002 10:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 110 (Bill Hoggett):
Bill Hoggett typed:
> 1)- you think the actual users in your user group are being unfair. Have you
I take your point that they are better versed in it than I am. But some of the
stuff also seem to be on a personal level, ie. they say Frank makes shrill or
annoying comments on the mailing lists.
> 2)- how much of your support for H&P and Mr Frank is due to their opposition
> to Amiga Inc?
I do NOT believe in the expression "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." You
may not believe it, but I think I would take the same view of the situation
even if those Masters of Evil Amiga Inc. ;) were not involved.
I even voted for Frank and Meyer in the Amiga Awards because I think they have
done more *so far* than anybody else. So I am not so one-sided as you think.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 158 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Daniel Miller on 02-Dec-2002 10:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 129 (catohagen):
catohagen typed:
> You find it surprising that I support amiga products ?
Of course not. I was just surprised that you took a broader view than some
others are taking.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 159 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Daniel Miller on 02-Dec-2002 10:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 114 (Christophe Decanini):
I did not say that all MorphOS users think the same. You must be smoking your
own rug, CD!
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 160 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Dec-2002 10:28 GMT
In reply to Comment 157 (Daniel Miller):
@Daniel
> I take your point that they are better versed in it than I am. But some of
> the stuff also seem to be on a personal level, ie. they say Frank makes
> shrill or annoying comments on the mailing lists.
He does. I'd say that was a particularly mild way of describing him. A quick search would demonstrate that he is frequently threatening and abusive whenever his opinion is as much as challenged, and makes no bones about not being bothered about his public image or making friends with anyone.
Don't take my word for it, visit places like the Amithlon or Mediator lists and make up your own mind.
> I even voted for Frank and Meyer in the Amiga Awards because I think they
> have done more *so far* than anybody else. So I am not so one-sided as you
> think.
OK, I can acknowledge that. Nevertheless, I think some tendency to sympathise with the opponents of Amiga Inc must exist, otherwise I see no reason why you should find anything sinister in the genuine opinions of your fellow user group members.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 161 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Dec-2002 10:53 GMT
I suppose Ill go aquire amithlon now and send bernie some money.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 162 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by AdmV on 02-Dec-2002 11:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Bill Hoggett):
I guess I will say what I have said previously. Until I see a court case, and a verdict based on legally held basis of fact, there is no broken law.
There is no 'bad' guy, dealer, coder, manufacturer. If Bernd feels he has people using his IP illegally then he should go to court. If others feel the same way they should do the same.
I am tired of all the finger pointing and bluff, counter bluff, and double bluff. People here in the amiga community waste such enormous quantities of time and effort spouting hot air.
If you damn well have a case, sue for damages. If you don't, then stop publicly stating you do, and sit down with your lawyer and sort it out.
The other alternative is to recode parts that need it. Or open source parts of the project where possible to provide such coding. Its clear there is a demand for this product, and some problems have caused this chosen path.
I have little true interest in it. I can't buy it, I can't code, so no offering of any help I can contribute is worthless, and I know just about fvck all about the truth behind the saga. Even IF I did, what good would it do ?
Anyway, I wish people well with whatever they do in life, whoever they may be.
AdmV
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 163 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 02-Dec-2002 11:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Bill Hoggett):
A very sad loss to the scene. But the truth - as always even in this watered down
version - will out and for once hopefully people know a little bit more about
the people that they are dealing with.
Goodbye Bernie, missed from the scene already!
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 164 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by darklite on 02-Dec-2002 11:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 115 (Mike Veroukis):
>Yes, you're right he should be blamed, but really, WHO THE FUCK CARES!?!? I'm so
>sick of this childish name calling and finger pointing! Can you PLEASE grow up?
Yes, H&P are evil.
But I also recall AInc threatening to sue H&P, of which we haven't heard anything since. Basically, they let H&P illegally use their own and Bernie's IP. The fact that Berniethlon is dead is a direct result of this.
>The problems isn't Bill M., it's H&P so why are you trying to cloud up the
>discussion here with this BULLSHIT!
Without 'pointing' fingers, this will happen again , because the people who are to blame will get away with it time and time again.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 165 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Dec-2002 11:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 134 (Mekanix):
>OS4 is a joke, made by the first person to put a dagger in Bernies spine. No
>chance in hell I'm gonna touch that product.
Boy you are an idiot! Bernie is good friends with the Hyerion folk.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 166 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by A.Scott Pringle on 02-Dec-2002 12:14 GMT
I will independently verify that legal threats have occurred. We received such threats. Said threats were not from any distributors but from other "interested" parties. I have become Very Much Cynical in my attitude of businesses currently operating in the Amiga market. Is it really so hard to "do the right thing?"
It saddens me that someone with great ability and a great product cannot display it to the world. There is only so long the same vultures can feed on the carcass before they move on. I hope their time draws near. One thing makes me smile...Karma.
My 2 cents.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 167 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by It's MEEE!!! on 02-Dec-2002 12:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Bill Hoggett):
You doesn't need to explain how our friend Haral Behaves.
Me knew him in Cologne in December 2001, he was very arrogant, he insisted to show to Me Quake while I was showing him some Amithlon bugs, he insisted on how fast Quake was running, Me said not care about Quake, and state concerns about the stability and reliability of Amithlon, Harald continued it's Quake tour, then finished showing Warp3D in a Voodoo card. He refused to discuss more about bugs and resumed his Quake demo... Too proud too arrogant.
I still remember what the person who came with me to that fare said that moment. He has never been an Amiga user and he said: why so much concern about Quake? it is four years old...
Sad but true.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 168 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Christophe Decanini on 02-Dec-2002 12:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 159 (Daniel Miller):
Daniel, I was just answering to Bill Hoggett point number 2.
I never told YOU that YOU said that all MorphOS users think the same.
I have just told Bill that it is not because someone (not you particularly) having interest in MorphOS is having his own opinion on something that "the MOS quarters" think the same. In this particular case it was about supporting H&P which I very doubt any people from the "the MOS quarters" will ever do.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 169 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Christophe Decanini on 02-Dec-2002 13:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 162 (AdmV):
>If you damn well have a case, sue for damages.
While I entirely agree with you such actions are difficult when you are an individual developer. Most of the people that have been in this situation do not have money to cover such lawsuit.
and even if you do have the money, if the other part has more money to have a lawyer that find a workaround to your legal threat then you are really screwed.
Justice is not that simple. Many companies have lost cases they were 100% sure to win.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 170 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Billy Boy on 02-Dec-2002 13:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 49 (Bill Hoggett):
rotfl. Anyway, you finally made it! Your flaming helped increase the differences between Harald and Bernie. Thanks for this. Thanks for participating in killing Amithlon. I don't know how to thank you best ..
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 171 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by AdmV on 02-Dec-2002 14:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 169 (Christophe Decanini):
I agree to some degree with your point. However, unless prepared to go to court, I would suggest an end to it.
If I WERE the writer of a copyrighted piece of code or writing, I would go to the ends of the earth to persue the people who breach it. Especially if they are a company.
The truth is that no-one in the amiga business has much money, and that there are other ways to skin a cat.
For instance, in the UK, you can make a complaint to agencies such as FAST or BSA.org OR trading standards. The seller can be raided. I am also sure that are organisations you can join who will help protect your rights and offer enforcement.
If H&P have breached a license, you could in theory raid their offices/shops, and have all copies /code removed, they could be fined, and you could claim damages.
I DO NOT BELIEVE that a copyright holder has no teeth, even if he is small. The issue is I think far more muddy and perhaps the IP / licensing in this instance does'nt have a single owner.
AdmV
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 172 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by amigammc on 02-Dec-2002 15:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Piru):
here comes another great attempt to troll an flame. That was written in September, so many things change in 3 moths.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 173 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Kronos on 02-Dec-2002 15:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 172 (amigammc):
"trolling" ?
Did McBill say(write) that, or did he not ? Did he tell us that it was to be released
soon or was he just making that bit up ?
This is the numbero_uno lessen AInc has to learn : Don't make premature announcements/
don't annouce announcemts.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 174 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 02-Dec-2002 16:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 170 (Billy Boy):
@"Billie Boy" the boy wonder.
>rotfl. Anyway, you finally made it! Your flaming helped increase the
>differences between Harald and Bernie. Thanks for this. Thanks for
>participating in killing Amithlon. I don't know how to thank you best ..
Go take a long walk off a short pier.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 175 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 02-Dec-2002 16:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 145 (Don Cox):
>I think the underlying idea is that programming should be treated like
>scientific research, as something done for the good of the community
>as a whole. Programmers, like research workers, would be paid a
>regular wage by the state or by foundations, and not paid according to
>the number of users of the software.
Well if that doesn't sound like socialism or communism I don't know what does! Hey I'm gonna write some for loops to see how long it takes to count to MAXINT. How do I get paid for this??!?
Honestly, I think the idea that all software should be free is pretty dumb. Having said that I have released software with full source on Aminet simply because I wanted to, for whatever reason. I sertainly felt no obligation to release it for free along with source and if I felt that people would actually pay for it I probably wouldn't have.
- Mike
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 176 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by your Momma on 02-Dec-2002 16:42 GMT
Would be an awful shame if the source code slip out onto the web...
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 177 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Dec-2002 16:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 134 (Mekanix):
That's ridiculous.
Hyperion has outstanding relations with Bernie Meyer.
We were in fact ready to license some OS 4 code for Berniethlon and I gave the P96 people some legal advice about certain threats made to them.
Our problems were always with Harald Frank who wanted to push Amithlon as an official x86 AmigaOS.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 178 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Dec-2002 16:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 176 (your Momma):
> Would be an awful shame if the source code slip out onto the web...
AFAIK only one person is in possession of said source code, and that person won't "leak" it or release it as open source, for the same reason that the files were removed from the site in the first place.
http://www.amithlon.net/closedown.shtml
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 179 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Dec-2002 16:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 177 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
@Ben
> We were in fact ready to license some OS 4 code for Berniethlon and I
> gave the P96 people some legal advice about certain threats made to them.
Ah, thanks for making that public, Ben. I was starting to choke on keeping it a secret for so long. :)
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 180 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Mike Veroukis on 02-Dec-2002 16:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 178 (Bill Hoggett):
>AFAIK only one person is in possession of said source code, and that person
>won't "leak" it or release it as open source, for the same reason that the
>files were removed from the site in the first place.
His best move is probably exactly what he is doing. Sit on the code and make a big stink about it on the forums. This isn't something that should be kept secret.
- Mike
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 181 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 02-Dec-2002 17:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 180 (Mike Veroukis):
> His best move is probably exactly what he is doing. Sit on the code and make
> a big stink about it on the forums. This isn't something that should be kept
> secret.
Bernd won't do that, he's much too talented to waste too much time on this, he'll mothball the project and move on to bigger things. He has talent enough to spare, without having to recoup the time he wasted on those losers.
it's a shame the Amiga community drives away the talented, by wasting their time.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 182 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Steffen Haeuser on 02-Dec-2002 17:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 156 (Bill Hoggett):
>Let's get a few things straight: the GPL can be considered a legal >document, but the FAQ is not. The latter merely clarifies the FSF's >interpretation of
I agree, it is not a legal document. But it is still an official document of the FSF. And I think an official document should not include purely subjective things... they can say so in private, but should not include
this into official documents without providing clear proof. Like it is
it sounds extremely unprofessional.
> the GPL and since they commissioned it for their own puproses, it >represents the "spirit" of the GPL.
Actually I do not think a contract (and that's what the GPL is, a licence contract) can have such a thing as a "spirit". It has contractual regulations, nothing more.
>Why should they care if you're annoyed by their stance or not? Do you >think they're bothered that Microsoft are much more than "annoyed" about >it?
Wether they care or not, I find it offensive. Especially as they claim it in a way, as if this would be only natural (while actually it isn't). They don't even give any reasons why this would be so.
Per Larsson:
>When you are talking about the freedom of selling and distributing your >programs without the source, you are at the same time "taking away" the >freedom of your users. Had you licensed your programs
On the other hand the GPL also takes away freedom - the freedom of using
GPL'ed code in all projects I am working on (projects with a licence
incompatible with the GPL for example). Other OpenSource-licences (the
BSD-licence for example are much "free"er than the GPL - I can use the
code in both OpenSource and ClosedSource projects). I am aware that when
the FSF says "free" they mean something very specific, which is not this
definition of "free".
Steffen Haeuser
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 183 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 02-Dec-2002 19:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 182 (Steffen Haeuser):
By the way, have you released the Quake 2 sources yet?
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 184 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by X on 02-Dec-2002 19:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 179 (Bill Hoggett):
@Ben
> We were in fact ready to license some OS 4 code for Berniethlon and I
> gave the P96 people some legal advice about certain threats made to them.
>Ah, thanks for making that public, Ben. I was starting to choke on keeping it a secret for so long. :)
What code was that? The new GUI? "HDToolbox"?
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 185 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by catohagen on 02-Dec-2002 20:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 183 (Nicholai Benalal):
i think someone who have the binaries/Q2 cdrom have to ask for the sources.
this is a thread for berniethlon, so you are kinda ot :)
why dont you email SteffenH@hyperion-entertainment.com for
your answer, you will probably get an answer quicker, than waiting in
a public forum...
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 186 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by KenH on 02-Dec-2002 20:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 177 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
>We were in fact ready to license some OS 4 code for Berniethlon and I gave the P96 people some legal advice about certain threats made to them.
Why did you have to tell us that!? Now it's worse that it's not happening! Sigh..trust Ben to make a a bad situation worse. ;) Irony btw.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 187 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 02-Dec-2002 20:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 185 (catohagen):
I haven't bought the package and I don't plan to (since I don't find Q2
to be a very interesting game and there are other ports anyway). However, I don't agree on
the interpretation that I need to buy the game to get the source from them. I was just wondering about
the status of this.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 188 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Dec-2002 20:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 183 (Nicholai Benalal):
Steffen and the rest of the Hyperion team are completely dependent on Free Software. This is probably very frustrating for them because they're also too stupid to understand how that happened. In any case, they resent it and lash out (as Steffen has here) at every opportunity.
Free Software is a political movement. Either Steffen is more stupid even than I had previously thought, or he wrote that stuff about being "offended" solely with a view to obtaining sympathy from poorly informed Amigans. Of course a hypocrite is offended by the suggestion that he is morally bankrupt. What else could we expect?
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 189 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Dec-2002 20:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 187 (Nicholai Benalal):
> I haven't bought the package and I don't plan to (since I don't find Q2
> to be a very interesting game and there are other ports anyway). However,
> I don't agree on the interpretation that I need to buy the game to get
> the source from them. I was just wondering about the status of this.
You don't have to BUY the game. You just need to get hold of the binary and the offer that must be distributed with it. If you can find someone to send it to you, that will suffice.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 190 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Dec-2002 20:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 183 (Nicholai Benalal):
Yes. At least one person has received a CD with over 80 MB of source-code including Quake 2 and quite a few Quake 2 mods.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 191 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 02-Dec-2002 20:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 189 (Bill Hoggett):
Well, I wonder if Hyperion agrees on that. I now heard they are asking for proof of
purchase when people demand their changes. I don't know if that's just a rumour though.
I'm a bit surprised that the source isn't freely available somewhere on the
net by now.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 192 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Dec-2002 20:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 187 (Nicholai Benalal):
Too bad.
Our "interpretation" was backed up by the Free Software Foundation (FSF).
Brecht/Darklite can testify to this or you can ask them yourself.
If you stop and think for a few seconds, you'll understand why not just anyone can ask for the source-code but only those people that are actually in possession of the binary.
If it were otherwise, any lunatic could ask for whatever source-code at any stage of a project as soon as he or she becomes aware of its existence.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 193 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 02-Dec-2002 20:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 179 (Bill Hoggett):
>> We were in fact ready to license some OS 4 code for Berniethlon and I
>> gave the P96 people some legal advice about certain threats made to them.
>Ah, thanks for making that public, Ben. I was starting to choke on keeping it
>a secret for so long. :)
Damnit! Damn you people :) Just rub some damn salt in our wounds why don't you!?
Oh, man this sucks hardcore :(
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 194 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 02-Dec-2002 20:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 192 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
I don't know who the people you mention. Anyway, I had the impression that anyone who got
the binary also had the right to the source...lunatic or not. In any case, you have
the most restrictive interpretation I've heard of when it comes to the GPL...just wondering why.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 195 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Dec-2002 20:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 191 (Nicholai Benalal):
We're not asking for proof of purchase.
We are asking that the person requesting the source-code sends us the written offer that comes with the freely distributable binary.
Some people don't understand the GPL and think it's some kind of harassment instrument.
This isn't our problem.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 196 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Dec-2002 20:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 194 (Nicholai Benalal):
>Anyway, I had the impression that anyone who got
>the binary also had the right to the source...lunatic or not.
Absolutely. The "problem" is that quite a few people who didn't have the binary asked for the source-code.
We don't honor their requests because they are not in possession of the "written offer" that comes with the binary.
This interpretation was backed up by the FSF who wrote the GPL.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 197 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 02-Dec-2002 21:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 191 (Nicholai Benalal):
> Well, I wonder if Hyperion agrees on that.
Yes, they do. Not that there's any choice.
> I now heard they are asking for proof of purchase when people demand
> their changes.
Not proof of purchase, but proof that you are in possession of the offer that must be distributed with the binary.
That is in compliance with the GPL and, as Ben said, it has been confirmed by the FSF.
The reason why the source and binary haven't been uploaded anywhere yet is because those who have them probaby feel that they would upset Hyperion by making them available, even if they're not doing anything wrong.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 198 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 02-Dec-2002 21:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 197 (Bill Hoggett):
I think most of our customers feel that they want to support us, they paid for our work and don't have any intrest in uploading something they paid for to the Aminet.
We're certainly not in any position to stop them from doing so nor did we even exert any moral pressure of any kind.
Then again Heretic 2 was uploaded to a pirate site the very same day it was released.
So I guess it evens out ;)
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 199 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 02-Dec-2002 21:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 195 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Well, some clarification from your side was indeed needed as you use a different
distribution policy than the one people are used to from most/all other GPL projects.
"Berniethlon" - The End : Comment 200 of 221ANN.lu
Posted by Hammer on 02-Dec-2002 21:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 111 (strobe):
> Actually all of the FSF members believe in this.
Members of something has nothing to do with the issue.
>That's the whole POINT to the FSF!
So? You don’t have to state the oblivious.
Anonymous, there are 221 items in your selection (but only 71 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 221]
Back to Top