Marcel Kilgus wrote:
> ___
> QL-Users Mailing List
Ooops, sorry, please disregard.
___
QL-Users Mailing List
___
QL-Users Mailing List
You won't win arguments with people like this, so you wither ignore
them and get on with your life or you deal with them in such a way
they can't / won't upset you again for a long time.
These "rules don't apply to me" people are generally of low moral
integrity and generally untrustworthy and wi
The only slight difference on copyright for software purposes has been to allow
a backup copy for personal use.
There are also rules applicable as to the length of time copyright is active
which have bearing. Basically it is life or lives in being plus 70 years.
However, if the authorship of th
I thought it would be worthwhile listing the people I have tried contacting by
letter but not received a response from:
Steve Sutton (Lightning, some of Perfection, ACT
Alan Bridewell (Text N Graphics)
Robin Barker - Di-Ren (letter returned no longer at this address)
Graham Kirk (MAXIM and QLART)
Has copyright in the electronic sense been investigated?
An author publishes an article, and an individual makes one copy of it for
only his use. That is allowable, but there could be qualifications of the
situation.
Colin McKay
___
QL-Users M
On 07/07/2016 17:31, Dilwyn Jones wrote:
<>
arsed walking to a smoking bay 10 yards away. The very same people who
moan if your car touches a line in a parking bay promptly go and park
their sacred expensive BMW across two parking bays next to you.
Back in the 90's I had the misfortune to driv
On 07/07/2016 15:15, Marcel Kilgus wrote:
pjwitte wrote:
I agree with everything you say above. I presume you do not mean to
imply that any significant /future/ software must also be free.
I'm certain nobody is implying this, least of all Wolfgang and me.
When I changed EasyPtr, which was not
Thanks Wolfgang
>> Those who appreciate the value of copyright do so because it is
>> 'right' to morally and financially support those who give energy to
>> projects that interest the community. Those who break copyright law
>> are ignorant of this, their minds commonly lacking respect for othe
I agree and a full list should be assembled with a coordinated effort. Still,
it begs the question, can the existing site be migrated to an alternate domain
if this becomes necessary. This would be the simplest solution and minimize
the disruption until your list of suggestions can get up and
> On July 7, 2016 at 7:13 PM Kurt K wrote:
>
>
> If I may reframe the matter not as a discussion on the relative merits of
> Copyright but in regard to the effect on the greater community. It is simply
> wrong to discontinue a worthy project, harm and reduce the viability of those
> supporting
If I may reframe the matter not as a discussion on the relative merits of
Copyright but in regard to the effect on the greater community. It is simply
wrong to discontinue a worthy project, harm and reduce the viability of those
supporting the QL due solely to a sad minority of individuals. Th
Hi,
Those who appreciate the value of copyright do so because it is 'right' to
morally and financially support those who give energy to projects that
interest the community. Those who break copyright law are ignorant of this,
their minds commonly lacking respect for others. Those who simply obse
Hi Rich,
Maybe with our legal backgrounds, we both see the need to protect rights and
for that reason neither of us would get involved in hosting copyrighted
files.
I mostly see the risks in doing that...
I don't want to get drawn into a debate whether copyright is "good" or
"bad" or "right
As I understand it, Rich came under attack from some (as yet unnamed)
sources because he (i) sells old programs for the QL and (ii) sent
take-down notices (or was suspected of sending them) to sites that
apparently hosted copyrighted files without the owners’ consent.
It's the sort of double stand
Hi
I don't often reply in the forum but I do watch it, and this thread caught
my attention.
Issues:
1. Integrity.
2. Letting go of personal attacks by trolls, and the trolls
themselves.
3. Copyright.
1. Integrity.
Those who appreciate the value of copyright do so beca
On 07/07/2016 11:13, Wolfgang Lenerz wrote:
Hi,
Just my 2 cents worth.
As I understand it, Rich came under attack from some (as yet unnamed)
sources because he (i) sells old programs for the QL and (ii) sent
take-down notices (or was suspected of sending them) to sites that
apparently hosted co
Hi Per,
>
> I agree with everything you say above. I presume you do not mean to
> imply that any significant /future/ software must also be free.
Ah, of course not, good catch!
Wolfgang
___
QL-Users Mailing List
pjwitte wrote:
> I agree with everything you say above. I presume you do not mean to
> imply that any significant /future/ software must also be free.
I'm certain nobody is implying this, least of all Wolfgang and me.
When I changed EasyPtr, which was not written by me originally but
improved at a
On 07/07/2016 12:13, Wolfgang Lenerz wrote:
Hi,
Just my 2 cents worth.
As I understand it, Rich came under attack from some (as yet unnamed)
sources because he (i) sells old programs for the QL and (ii) sent
take-down notices (or was suspected of sending them) to sites that
apparently hosted co
Hi,
Just my 2 cents worth.
As I understand it, Rich came under attack from some (as yet unnamed)
sources because he (i) sells old programs for the QL and (ii) sent
take-down notices (or was suspected of sending them) to sites that
apparently hosted copyrighted files without the owners’ consent.
21 matches
Mail list logo
