Re: [NTLK] newtontalk Digest V1 #181 (copyright discussion)

From: McComb Keith (KMcComb_at_nycboe.net)
Date: Fri Sep 07 2001 - 13:53:27 EDT


Yeah, I've been wondering about the direction this conversation has been
going for a while. To be honest, there are thouse who would consider
that e-mail from A Newtonian to be advocating Newton Warez, because
Iambic rescinded permissions.

I think we should agree to disagree here. Everyone has slightly
different ideas, and slightly different ways of expressing themselves.
It seems to me that if a reasonable effort to contact to owner of the
copyright is made (phone calls, letters, e-mails), and no response is
forthcoming, then the software should be considered abandoned. (And
there should be multiples of each attempt, IMHO. One try doesn;t cut it
in my book.)

Sorry for butting into this conversation.

Keith McComb

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric L. Strobel [mailto:fyzycyst_at_home.com]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 1:39 PM
To: newtontalk_at_newtontalk.net
Subject: Re: [NTLK] newtontalk Digest V1 #181 (copyright discussion)

at the temporal coordinates: 9/7/01 1:18 PM, the entity known as
Michael_Guzzo/Harmac_at_harmac.com at Michael_Guzzo/Harmac_at_harmac.com
conveyed
the following:

>=20
>=20
> Eric L. Strobel <fyzycyst_at_home.com> wrote:
> --
> Is there any software company that's still profiting from 14
> year old software (it's probably a stretch to find any that still
market
> s/w
> from even 7 years ago)??
> --
>=20
> MacOS - copyright 1983 to present
> WinWord - copyright 1983 to present
> Lotus Organizer 2.1 (still available for sale if you can find it) -
> copyright 1991 to 1996.
>=20

But Apple is not still selling System 1.0 (in fact, one can freely
download
Systems up to 7.something), I don't know what the oldest version of Word
is
that MS still actually sells, and I know nothing about Lotus. The point
is
that while many companies are still selling updated versions of software
from years past, few, if any, companies are still selling the EXACT
software
they sold 14 years ago.

Note too that I'm NOT saying that the SOURCE should be made available.
The
expression of the idea that we're concerned about is an executable for
our
Newts that is potentially accessible, but can't legally be used due to
copyright laws.

- Eric.

--
This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net
To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or
	mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=3Dunsubscribe

-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Oct 03 2001 - 12:01:33 EDT