🚀 go-pugleaf

I have expanded the distribution to include net.legal since I think this
case represents something that many have anticipated for some time and
will be of interest and concern to many people outside the amiga area.
I was tempted but refrained from including other micro groups.  Perhaps
we can summarize what develops for those groups a little later.

To recap for those who are seeing this for the first time:

A company which redistributes PD software for profit is distributing an
adaptation of "Hack" for the Amiga.

The author of the adaptation, whose name and phone number appear in the
software being distributed, has contacted the company and asked them to
stop distributing the software.  They offered to make a business
arrangement but have not done so at this time and the author is, for a
number of reasons, not really interested in making a deal.

The author has contacted AmigaWorld and asked them to refuse advertisements
which feature "Hack".  They have said they will continue to accept ads
until they are shown a court order stating that the company cannot sell
the program.

The author's posting asked for suggestions on available remedies and listed
those he was considering.


I am focusing my remarks on what his legal remedies might be. Some
suggestions of other remedies have been made and may well be the best
course of action.

The first legal step would seem to be establishing that the author does
have a legal ownership of the software.  This probably means a proper
copyright.  If he does not have a proper copyright, he may be able to
remedy the copyright.  There are a number of good books that cover how to
secure a valid copyright.  I have read and would recommend Remer's Legal
Care for Your Software from Nolo Press (about $20).

I believe there are a number of pre-suit steps that can be taken to let
someone know you are serious about defending your copyright.  I also
believe that it is correct that you must undertake the defense of your own
copyright.  I defer to the books or to someone more knowledgeable for
details here.

The real crux of the legal problem as I see it is that authors who wish to
make a true PD contribution, a selfless donation of software to the
computing community, have no economic support to use for defense of a
copyright.  Is a copyright that is not being used to protect an economic
position worthless?  The pat answer for prevention of profiteering on PD
work has been copyright.  Now we have an opportunity to see if it will
work.  How should one defend a copyright given that there is no source of
money for the defense?

The only legal solution I can think of is the use of small claims court.
This minimizes, but does not eliminate, the economic hardship placed on the
PD copyright holder.  It also prevents the PD profiteer from gaining much
advantage from his economically superior position, although he still has an
advantage.  Would anyone care to comment on whether copyright infringement
could be brought to small claims court and how it might be most effectively
persued?

Disclaimers: These are personal opinions.  They are in no way associated
with my employer, the Rand Corp.  I am not an attorney and nothing
contained in this message should be considered as legal advice.