🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1850@alvin.mcnc.UUCP> ravi@alvin.UUCP (Ravi Subrahmanyan) writes:
>In article <1407@lsuc.UUCP> jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) writes:
>>
>> ....  The 'BREAKOUT' desk accessory was *not* public domain.  It was
>>proprietary code from Atari.  ..........
>
>	In defense of Eric, I must say that I too had a copy of

     Actually, I tried to word my posting to avoid casting any blame in
any direction.  I certainly don't know that it was Eric's fault and I
have no particular reason to believe that he would have posted it if he
had known better.

>breakout.acc, which I fully believed to be a PD product, and which
>I've given away to some other people;  now this whole thing has me
>worried because __ I got the acc from a local dealer, who has it in a disk
>of PD software that he lets people copy __.  I obviously can't *prove*
>that's how I got it, but is it an authorised copy if the dealer gave
>it away?  Did Atari mean to sell it, or distribute it through dealers?

     I don't think Atari meant to allow it out.  Neil's postings seem to
indicate that they hadn't come to any decision on the matter, but I'll
defer the question to him.

>Is there a legal problem in such a case, ie. does my receiving it free
>from the dealer mean I am not to give it away also (I can hardly

     The absolute legal rights depend on the surrounding facts so I won't
bother to try to tell you the answer to your question.  Frankly, fully
aside from the legal rights, in a situation like this I usually kill the
file eventually out of respect for the author's wishes.  The only reason
I keep it around at all is a matter of curiosity (to see if it actually
worked).  I've already killed my copy of BREAKOUT.

     Please keep in mind that there is a difference between the BREAKOUT
code problems and the TI-59 code problems.  If we can obliterate the TI
trademarks in the TI-59 emulator, I can't see anything wrong with that
one.  As such I would like to encourage you to keep that program with the
objective of making the necessary changes and re-posting a version which
doesn't create unnecessary legal problems.  TI may disagree with me on this
point, but at least we would have at least avoided the obvious and clear
legal problems.

>imagine the dealer would give it if he could sell it)?
>
>							-ravi