>> Abandonware is computer software which is no longer being sold or >> supported by its copyright holder. Alternativeely, the term is also used >> for software which is still available, but on which further support and >> development has been deliberately discontinued. Sometimes, it is used as >> a blanket category for any software over a certain age, usually five >> years. >> >No this is two different arguments. Most of the QL software was written >in the UK and the UK copyright laws do not recognise any such term as >abandonware.
Nearly all computer game companies were from UK. Now AW. >I for one am unwilling to host downloads on my website which >may leave me open to legal suits from the original author for infringement >of their copyright. Under UK law, copyright lasts life + 50 years, so we >have a long way to go. It is certainly a risk, but we won't be there in 50 years. >As a software author I also disagree completely with the argument of >abandonware - many of the routines I have written in my software remain >protected by copyright and have been used in other software on other >machines - I would not want to give away the secrets to all and sundry. >Indeed some of my code has been coded so as to make the method of >circumventing certain problems particularly obscure so that I could easily >identify where that code has been utilised elsewhere. I understand this argument and partially agree. I am not telling that source code shall be free. Your software is protected by copyright even if it's free(ware). AW is still protected by copyright law. Frankly speaking there are hardly some software secrets which hasn't been unveiled already. Look at programmers heaven, sourceforge, algorithm archive... etc. There are websites with fully documented sources of anything you can imagine of. You don't need to reinvent the wheel and look into someones programs to get the algorithms. >From the other side, if there is no source available, there is no way to stop >someone in hacking others software. I think you also pointed that some old >programs had to be reverse-engineered to be able to make modifications for new >QL HW. How did you faced up that license violation? >Certainly I know of a few old QL software companies that would also take >this stance particularly bearing in mind the money they paid for >development of the software. Well, it'a question. Making a website like world of spectrum (WOS), with company info, images, authors, history, maybe a link to current website. I can imagine that former authors would be interested. >>> to released into the public domain. Where are all the public domain >>> hoardes of people using free tools to develop that further? >> >> I can tell you, they are playing with other old computers. E.g. Amiga, >> ZX... There is much easier way to get what you need. > >Actually I don't think that the QL users / programmers went on to program >the Amiga and Spectrum. Some did move onto the Amiga, but the 68008 has >actually created a much stronger breed of programmers than the Z80 - many >have moved onto Unix, Linux and realtime programming (controls software, >which is mainly 68000 based). Again, I am not comparing Z80 and 68k. I am comparing retro computers. You didn't get my point. If anyone interested in old computers (like someone is interested in old cars) would decide to play with this or that old platform, he would hardly chose QL, because there are strong walls. Now, we can buy Amiga 1200 on eBay for a few bucks and it's fair enough for games and for development as well - there are sites which are hosting everything what was ever written for amiga (or whatever else computer). So, the hoardes of people interested in retro computing and wasting their free time are there - on another platforms. Most probably having more fun than with QL. I don't think you can see this argument if you have everything ever written for QL. Software demonstrates capabilities of the computer. If there is lack of available software, it's hard to be interested what the machine can do. Same for development, QL is complex enough to be called "black box" without docs. Back to processors, 68k is half-dead CPU. Motorola sold the CPU business to Freescale and as far as I know, native 68k is supported only on the DragonBall (68000). Higher 68k versions are not produced anymore. I am not sure if another chip manufacturer licensed it from Motorola. FYI, Z80 is still living, it is used in embedded applications and it's main business for Zilog even today. >> I am mising more pages like Qdos Internals. HTML version of docs, >> diagrams, schematics, source code, examples. Quanta has some software >> and documentation library for members. This should be made available for >> free. It is probably another "terrorist" approach in your eyes, but from >> my outside point of view it is a must. > >Ah, but if Quanta made all this free, what reason would there be for >Quanta to exist? It would offer no different benefits to its members than >the general public (apart from the magazine). I have no idea why it exists anyway. There is absolutely NOTHING on the Quanta web page what would give me information what they can do for me if I would pay the membership. Quanta should be kind of QL portal with docs, software, eshop if you want...etc. Current page is a dinosaur. Quanta: are you reading? >> Let's make the QL games archive! At least these few games will be played >> again (after 10 years of waiting on some microdrive). > >Erm - copyright problem - who is willing to take on the task? I would if I would have time. >> Again, let me compare the principle: on ZX, Amiga, Atari, ZX...etc, no >> one bothers about licenses in old software, because authors disappeared >> or gave permission to make it available (including big games companies >> like Ocean, Gremlin, Infogrames, Dynamic..etc). See above about AW. >> >> Why should this be an issue on QL to make old games and software for >> free? >> >Maybe because the majority of people who provide feedback on this list are >themselves software developers or traders and would do everything they can >to protect their own copyright. Correct. I am trying to change something unchangeable. ------------------------------------------ www.icqsms.cz _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
