[ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep

[TonyTebby]

While walking on the fells, I came across a sheep with its horns entangled in a wire fence. With great difficulty I managed to free it and, by way of reward for saving it from a certain, lingering death, it tried to take my fingers off.   More about mad sheep and fingers later. This note is written in response to some very strange comments that have been published in this list and elsewhere.   Before attempting to set the record straight, I shall try to explain the principle of royalties (or licence fees).   The principle is that an author devotes a few hours, a few months or many years creating what the law considers, rather quaintly, to be a "work of art". A "work of art" is not like other commodities. If you buy a book, the author gets a royalty on the sale, but, if you do not like the story, or if there are fatal flaws in the story line or even grammatical errors, you cannot get your money back.   If an author is lucky or has a good agent (being a good author has almost nothing to do with it) his book becomes a best seller and the author pockets royalties out of all proportion to the effort that went into the book. Usually, the author (or the painter, the composer etc.) is unlucky.   In all cases, however, the royalties only come some time after the work has been done. The royalties are a recognition of the work that has already been done. An author does not receive royalties to pay for new "works of art" or to improve existing works of art. Royalties are a payment for work that has already been done and nothing else.   Royalties are due by anyone who makes a copy of a "work of art". A licence is slightly different - it is the permission to copy a "work of art". Making a copy without a licence is a criminal act. A licence may be tied to a support contract, but in the case of SMSQ-E, the "licence fee" has always be pure author's royalties (legally and fiscally).   I wrote QDOS for the QL, it was not perfect, but it sort of worked. It was not the operating system that I would have liked to write, but it was the operation system I was paid to write. After the demise of Sinclair, I was under considerable pressure to provide a legal, maintainable alternative to pirated copies of QDOS (there are still pirated copies of QDOS being sold 16 years later). No one was prepared to pay me to do it, but I gave in and did it anyway.   If you take all the royalties I have received for SMSQ-E and multiply by 10, it would still not pay for the development that was done for the various machines SMSQ-E was made available on. The only payments that I have received for support have been from a small number of generous people or groups who have contributed to the development of specific improvements that were made available to everyone. I never really thought releasing SMSQ-E would be worthwhile, but I was naïve enough to think that it might save my fingers. It didn't.   ==================================   Now for setting the record straight.   Wolfgang Lenerz   About a year ago, suggestions started to be made seriously to make it possible for development to continue by making the SMSQ-E source publicly available. Nothing particularly radical about that, authors of books do it all the time, and I had already communicated complete or partial sources to various people who had requested them.   Wolfgang Lenerz consulted me before setting off to Eindhoven to discuss the proposals with "interested parties". I do love to say "I told you so". I told him that if he went to Eindhoven, he would be "voted" to run the whole show, and what this was likely to do to his life. But he went anyway.   Wolfgang Lenerz has been working (unpaid) to try to discourage aggressive lockout policies designed try and capture a larger share of the QL "market" at the expense of QL users. I.e. he has been trying to maintain a coherent cross platform environment. It is possible that you may have different ideas on how this can be achieved, but Wolfgang Lenerz has no personal or commercial stake - he has been working for the benefit of QL users and anyone who says otherwise is LYING.   I suggest you think very carefully about the mentality of those who have thrown the insults that Wolfgang Lenerz has been receiving.   ----------------------------------------------------------------   The 10 Euro ($10) royalty   In Wolfgang Lenerz's message in the list he states "Under this licence, only appointed resellers may sell the software, provided, notably, that a 10 euro payment is made to Tony Tebby for each copy sold."   I did not actually negotiate this but it was offered and I agreed. But think very carefully about it. This is a royalty as payment for the original development. It is not a payment for services, further developments etc.   Before this arrangement came into force, Jochen Merz collected licence fees as my agent. He kept a share for providing support and passed on the rest as royalties (but his share was not really large enough to pay the time that he spent supporting SMSQ-E - for that he would have needed to take several 100% and I can't afford that).   With the new arrangement, Jochen Merz apparently still collects some licence fees, but he gets no cut at all. This dramatically reduces the licence fees to be paid on "legal" copies of SMSQ-E. This is, apparently not good enough for some people who just do not want to pay at all.   ------------------------------------------------------------------   The Q60 - a lack of communication   Dennis Smith (D&D Systems) states   "Has this bloke [Wolfgang Lenerz] gone nuts? We have been producing the Q60 for over a year and Wolfgang has never contacted me once, even though he agreed to do so with Tony Firshman and Derek. So I am still waiting for this contact or is this above the contact he means?" and "Licence money has been paid. I have replied to Tony Tebby's email (to me) and I am now waiting for the return reply."   My e-mail to D&D systems posed a number of questions (including the failure to pay royalties on the SMSQ-E shipped with the Q60) to which Dennis Smith did not reply. Instead he suggested discussions with very strict and totally unacceptable pre-conditions and I quote   "Confidential in as much as you will not pass information on to any other interested party, this way I can speak freely and as I want. Don't tell Wolfgang, Marcel, Jochen etc. etc. On my part I must tell Derek all (partner) and allow Peter Graf (associate) at least to have some information (maybe all) of what is happening."   Who do you think has been refusing to communicate?   ------------------------------------------------------------------   The Q60 - licence fee (royalties)   Dennis Smith states that "We have been producing the Q60 for over a year" and "Licence money has been paid" - who was this licence money paid to? I certainly did not get it.   -------------------------------------------------------------------   More in sorrow…   I accept the blame for writing QDOS and the consequences, but what have Wolgang Lenerz, Jochen Merz and others done to merit the treatment they are getting - they deserve to keep their fingers.   Tony Tebby