Hi Marcel,
This is the argument for Abandonware. Yet our copyright laws in the UK
(whatever individual opinions might be) are clear enough as to what we can
and can't do, and our chances of being prosecuted are high enough. Rich
trained as a solicitor, he should know.
Once contact has been made with authors/copyright holders, Rich generally
passes on software to me to make public unless the author forbids it - the
ones that get published are the choice of the copyright holder. By and
large, you don't hear of just how many QL programs Rich has secured
permission to pass on to me to make available, many times what few he
re-publishes. But people rarely credit him for that side of his work.
You did the decent thing and chose the make your software freely available
and full credit to you for that. Most of the software I've written has also
become free, it all will sooner or later as I get time.
The whole preservation thing has revolved around trying to keep copies of as
many QL softwares as possible ready for the day when the authors take the
same attitude as you (it can't be released unless there are copies - most of
the authors Rich managed to contact had no copies of their own software to
offer us). If the authors persist in trying to keep programs commercial,
however futile it might seem, that's their right I suppose, but without the
huge effort people like Rich have put in there would be no copies of the
software to make available anyway.
Your email is understandably aimed at authors. Please bear in mind the rough
treatment Rich Mellor has had from some quarters for nothing more than
trying to keep some form of QL trading going. I presume that things like
keyboard membranes might not be available were it not for the little profits
Rich makes from his commercial activities.
Dilwyn Jones
-----Original Message-----
From: Marcel Kilgus
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 11:02 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ql-Users] Withdrawal of my personal Software
PreservationProject
Rich Mellor wrote:
I shall however, not get involved in software piracy.
Really no disrespect to you or your work. But, as a creator of
software and probably of the most commercially successful QL software
of the last 15 years, I find this whole piracy debate in the QL scene
pretty laughable. This is mostly software that hasn't been touched,
supported or updated in 30 years. Why would anybody care what happens
to it? The decent thing to do for the authors is making the stuff
freely available (sans copy protection if possible) once you're
leaving for greener pastures. That's what I do with my stuff.
The creators have abandoned the software, so what's the harm in
having it freely available? Who in their right mind would actually go
to court over some MDV image of software they haven't touched in 30
years?
So far I've kept quiet in the debate out of respect for you and your
work. But all this is against my common sense. I can't imagine that
this whole commercial re-releasing of ancient software is in any way
worth it. It's a bit of a shame, too, I would like to try some of the
old QL games, sure, but I would never spend a single cent on them,
ever. I would probably only play them a few minutes each, just for the
fun of it, and that's that then. And I guess I'm not alone in this
respect.
The QL is dying (dead?) and keeping stuff commercial is not really
helping in this respect. I released EasyPtr for free recently because
I was asked how one could obtain a copy and I found it really too
embarrassing to still ask for any money for this old stuff.
Marcel
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7640 / Virus Database: 4627/12565 - Release Date: 07/05/16
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
