🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <8911280802.AA18983@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> JOHNBARNES@ENH.NIST.GOV writes:
>Why Not, I ask?  If people want to burn their own ROMS, why not let
>them?  Atari should even provide diagnostic files that can be run to
>test the validity of user-generated ROMS.

I can certainly understand why Atari protects their ROMs...

They do it for the same reason that Apple protects theirs.  If Mac ROMs were
freely redistributable, then Mac emulators would be EVERYWHERE!  What would
that do to Apple?

Ah, you're thinking "Yes, but who in their right mind would want to emulate
an ST?"  Amiga owners, for one.  About a month ago, there was a lot of traffic
on comp.sys.amiga regarding a P.D. Atari ST emulator which DIDN'T WORK!
It seems that the original version of the emulator (which was distributed on
disk) had illegal copies of Atari ROMs stored on "unused" sectors of the
disk.  When somebody uploaded it, they forgot to upload the illegal ROMs.
So anybody who downloaded the emulator got a useless package.

Some people wondered if they were using it wrong.  Some were angry because they
had gone to a lot of trouble and still hadn't managed to steal anything.  Some
jokingly said "Yep, real Atari's work that way, too."

Nobody said "This is wrong.  We *shouldn't* copy Atari ROMs like this."

>Why Not, I ask?  If people want to burn their own ROMS, why not let
>them?  Atari should even provide diagnostic files that can be run to
>test the validity of user-generated ROMS.

Because they can't trust us to use them as Atari intended.
Because they have a reputation to protect (such as it is).
Because they don't want to support a product that doesn't earn them money.
Because copyrights can be lost if they aren't enforced.
Because parts of the ROMs are really copyrighted by DRI, not Atari.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Kirkendall, kirkenda@jove.cs.pdx.edu, uunet!tektronix!psueea!jove!kirkenda