Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
- Original Message - From: Wolfgang Lenerz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 11:24 AM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep On 9 Nov 2002, at 2:48, dndsystems1 wrote: (...) Yes I wanted a private corrispondnce with him without outside influence. My question: Do you personally see any way to build in more flexibility to the licence to accomodate the programmers that do not like vatious parts of it. Just what exactly did you have in mind here? If I understand this correctly, there would be some amendment to the licence for a special few? Is that realistic? Wolfgang If a little nudge helped make things better, yes. Don't redo the whole licence but if impossible to help, lets forget it. Dennis - DD Systems
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
More in sorrow. I accept the blame for writing QDOS and the consequences, but what have Wolgang Lenerz, Jochen Merz and others done to merit the treatment they are getting - they deserve to keep their fingers. Tony Tebby Thanks for stepping in on this matter, Tony, and it is good to know you are across this list. Hopefully, your authority and knowledge will help to speedily clarify and resolve this matter, to the good of all concerned. -- Dilwyn Jones
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
Tony's statements have backed up many of the things that we have been saying over the last few months and should really blow the cobwebs away from those who doubted. Still, given the way some people seem to react, I suppose there will be those who do not believe him either. Well, looking at the discussion, accusations etc. restrospectively I find it hard to believe there are still doubts. Not only regarding paranoia, conspiracy matters etc. but also the fact, that some people demanded and behaved in a way which made you think somebody was giving away public property and everybody had the right to demand! It was overdue that Tony has clarified this - thanks a lot! Still a shame that he actually had to it at all after his generous move. Jochen
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
Hi Dave, A trader has the sdame right to sell an item they own as any private individual. Indeed. Provided, he actually owns it at that time. But nobody questioned all this... :-) Jochen
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
Dave P wrote: Well, that's illegal in every European country. Once someone owns a license to software, they're free to sell it to whomsoever they wish under the first sale doctrine. I don't think anybody suggested that this is not the case. Marcel
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Marcel Kilgus wrote: Dave P wrote: Well, that's illegal in every European country. Once someone owns a license to software, they're free to sell it to whomsoever they wish under the first sale doctrine. I don't think anybody suggested that this is not the case. Wolfgang said that DD had to approach him to request to be resellers. This is completely unnecessary, if they just want to sell existing copies. However, if they want to sell official, supported copies, they would benefit from registering. It's all very confusing! Dave
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
??? 8/11/2002 12:15:40 ??, ?/? Dave P [EMAIL PROTECTED] ??: On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Jochen Merz wrote: A trader has the same right to sell an item they own as any private individual. Indeed. Provided, he actually owns it at that time. But nobody questioned all this... :-) Not even me. I think it is clear now that DD is selling unlicensed copies, and that they should make a gratious payment, and close the issue. However, my point was more simple, that nobody has to be an official reseller to sell SMSQ/E. They must merely own what they sell. Not in the States!... As many US licenses (See imprisonment agreements) state you are not allowed to sell your software and license to another user if you are the original end-user (ie retail buyer). (These have been pushed down the throats of many European customers which on occasion have fought them in court and won... Nonetheless our beloved M$ company keeps pushing them... Phoebus
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep -a deep groan
On 8 Nov 2002, at 17:15, Dave P wrote: (...) Now that we've had two or three different problems with the license, and Wolfgang has given various reassurances (which has been a positive experience, Wolfgang!), Thanks, but this begs the question - have I been acting in accordance with these reassurances? (Just BEGGING for a compilment here, of course). maybe we can amend the license a little to make these assurances explicit? It's november. Maybe we could make the relatively minor changes and have SMSQ/E license v1.1 come into force on January 1st? Oh groan. Groan. Groan. groan. Mind you,I'm not saying no - just, well, groan. Do you really want us to go through the entire debate again every year? I'm not looking at this as a way to squeeze more out of the license, No comment... but merely to tidy up those parts that have alrerady been found ambiguous? Maybe Wolfgang would like to submit the license to annual review, as the situation will change over time? Actually, I wouldn't like it - but if there is really a demand for that, I'll do it. Wolfgang - www.wlenerz.com
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
On 8 Nov 2002, at 16:00, Dave P wrote: Well, that's illegal in every European country. Once someone owns a license to software, they're free to sell it to whomsoever they wish under the first sale doctrine. You cannot restrict someone's right to sell something they own, even by license, once the first sale has occured. You can only require they place the same conditions of sale on their buyer as you placed on them. Unfortunetely, things aren't as clearcut as that. 1 - Remember that a licence is a licence to USE... 2 - There is a huge difference between a user who has bought a licence to use a software and a reseller who buys the licence to resell the software. Wolfgang - www.wlenerz.com
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep -a deep groan
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Wolfgang Lenerz wrote: Thanks, but this begs the question - have I been acting in accordance with these reassurances? Put it this way; every time an issue is raised, you have worked diligently to resolve it. Sometimes I question your methods, but your results are usually most satisfactory to most people. relatively minor changes and have SMSQ/E license v1.1 come into force on January 1st? Oh groan. Groan. Groan. groan. Appendix? Do you really want us to go through the entire debate again every year? That isn't necessary. I was thinking maybe in mid-November each year you could post a summary of issues that have arisen during the year, and propose changes. Simply ignore and do not respond to discussion outside of those very limited points. Yearly may well be too much. However, I think some know time and place to suggest and discuss small changes or corrections would be nice. Actually, I wouldn't like it - but if there is really a demand for that, I'll do it. Not the *whole* license. Just the parts that seem contentious or ambiguous? Dave
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
- Original Message - From: Roy Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:52 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep In message 005201c2864a$e385e4e0$0d5c933e@tony, TonyTebby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes BIG SNIP Confidential in as much as you will not pass information on to any other interested party, this way I can speak freely and as I want. Don't tell Wolfgang, Marcel, Jochen etc. etc. On my part I must tell Derek all (partner) and allow Peter Graf (associate) at least to have some information (maybe all) of what is happening. Who do you think has been refusing to communicate? -- The Q60 - licence fee (royalties) Dennis Smith states that We have been producing the Q60 for over a year and Licence money has been paid - who was this licence money paid to? I certainly did not get it. --- More in sorrow I accept the blame for writing QDOS and the consequences, but what have Wolgang Lenerz, Jochen Merz and others done to merit the treatment they are getting - they deserve to keep their fingers. Tony Tebby I think that this says it all really and anyone who has any cause to doubt the honesty of those who have striven to keep SMSQ/E on course should take note. I personally feel I owe a debt of gratitude to TT for all of his work over these years. His enthusiasm on the occasions when we met certainly played a large part in keeping my interest in the QL going. Tony's statements have backed up many of the things that we have been saying over the last few months and should really blow the cobwebs away from those who doubted. Still, given the way some people seem to react, I suppose there will be those who do not believe him either. -- Roy Wood Q Branch, 20 Locks Hill Portslade. Sussex. BN41 2LB. UK Tel : +44 (0)1273 386030 Fax : +44 (0)1273 430501 (New number!) Mobile +44(0)7836 745501 Web : www.qbranch.demon.co.uk Yes I wanted a private corrispondnce with him without outside influence. My question: Do you personally see any way to build in more flexibility to the licence to accomodate the programmers that do not like vatious parts of it. Asking this question in public might have restricted his answer. All fair enough I thought. We don't need the answer now. 2 or 3 emails and I would have had a result to work with. I sent it at the beginning of September and no response. In his original email to me he says it takes him weeks to summon up courage to even think about SMSQ/E (approx quote) so I thought he was taking a lot of time to reply, ok I'll wait. It gets worse. I had caught him originally by chance when he used the supnet address but I replied to him using the same address, result is if he sends to me it will be deleted unless I use one of the other computers that do not filter like that. If I loose some emails it does not matter because I only use supanet for 'the list'. Oops! I should have given him one of the private addresses. I found this out Thursday. Dennis - DD Systems
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
Tony Tebby wrote: (rest of message clipped). I just hope that this put some doubts to rest. And again I appeal to DD - let's get on with it, correct the situation, it isn't too late yet. Wolfgang - www.wlenerz.com
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
TonyTebby wrote: [much] Thanks a lot for clarifying the issue. I think this was really necessary. May common sense return to the land of the sheep, Marcel
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Marcel Kilgus wrote: May common sense return to the land of the sheep, Baa! I don't want common sense. I want extraordinary sense! Yes, TT surely clarified the situation. I read it in my mind's ear in a God-like voice. I was waiting for him to go to Eindhoven and jump up and down on stage screaming Developers! Developers! Developers! :o) Of course, now he's going to get a bunch of emails from his devotees telling him how wonderful he is. I really should get started on mine, so I have to go now. Dave PS: Sorry about the email, they don't allow crayons in here.
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
Dave P wrote: I don't want common sense. I want extraordinary sense! I'd already be satisfied with common sense after the mails within the last few days. Makes me stop wanting to bang my head against the wall. I was waiting for him to go to Eindhoven and jump up and down on stage screaming Developers! Developers! Developers! :o) Is this some obscure reference I don't get? A joke? Or just extraordinary sense? Of course, now he's going to get a bunch of emails from his devotees telling him how wonderful he is. Jealous? PS: Sorry about the email, they don't allow crayons in here. Quick, somebody give that man some crayons! Marcel
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
TonyTebby writes: Well, I think this sorts the sheep from the goats ;) Id like to take this opportunity to thank Tony Tebby, and also many others, some of whom he has mentioned in his mail, for all you have done for QL-users! Id like to assure you that your ingenuity, time and effort has given us many hours of good clean fun, as well as made significant contributions to many aspects of our work and leisure activities over the years. Thank you very much! An operating system is a rather special piece of software: Its job is to create a firm, understood and stable environment out of a disparate and confusing array of platforms. This then is the foundation on which we can let our diverse imaginations run riot to do all those wierd and wonderful things we want to do. Freedom through dicipline sounds just about right. The dicipline demanded of us is to work within the License - there can be no doubt now about the terms under which we have the right to continue to develop SMSQ-E. Once the foundation is secure we can enjoy the freedom this gives in full measure. I hope we can continue to build on this glorious system, to continue to improve it to meet our changing needs/demands, and to strive towards that elusive system that allows us to do what each of us wants, the way we want. QL-users should realise that we are in a unique position to have such a possibility. Lets not foul up here! Lets forget our disagreements and try to work together! Per
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Marcel Kilgus wrote: I was waiting for him to go to Eindhoven and jump up and down on stage screaming Developers! Developers! Developers! :o) Is this some obscure reference I don't get? A joke? Or just extraordinary sense? Some top guy at Microsoft did this on stage at a developers conference, and came off sounding a bit loony! Of course, now he's going to get a bunch of emails from his devotees telling him how wonderful he is. Jealous? Nah. I'm more famous to more people than TT, and I really crave the anonymity he has. Never be in the music business :/ Quick, somebody give that man some crayons! Assokay, my boss just brought me some. :o) Dave
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
Dave P wrote: Some top guy at Microsoft did this on stage at a developers conference, and came off sounding a bit loony! Ah, the ape. I actually saw that one. Nah. I'm more famous to more people than TT, and I really crave the anonymity he has. Never be in the music business :/ Right. I already thought Dave P sounds like a rapper. Marcel
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
??? 7/11/2002 2:26:05 ??, ?/? Marcel Kilgus [EMAIL PROTECTED] ??: Quick, somebody give that man some crayons! Nah he won't like them unless they have an ARM processor and embedded Linux in them ;-) Phoebus
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
- Original Message - From: TonyTebby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:45 AM Subject: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep snip You sent this to the Supanet address so it is auto deleted, there is the fault, see other email. I have never seen your reply to me. I should have told you to use [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dennis Smith states that We have been producing the Q60 for over a year and Licence money has been paid - who was this licence money paid to? I certainly did not get it. Jochen, and at year end you can have some more if I can find out what the starting date of this new licence is supposed to be. --- More in sorrow. I accept the blame for writing QDOS and the consequences, but what have Wolgang Lenerz, Jochen Merz and others done to merit the treatment they are getting - they deserve to keep their fingers. Tony Tebby
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
In message 005201c2864a$e385e4e0$0d5c933e@tony, TonyTebby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes BIG SNIP Confidential in as much as you will not pass information on to any other interested party, this way I can speak freely and as I want. Don't tell Wolfgang, Marcel, Jochen etc. etc. On my part I must tell Derek all (partner) and allow Peter Graf (associate) at least to have some information (maybe all) of what is happening. Who do you think has been refusing to communicate? -- The Q60 - licence fee (royalties) Dennis Smith states that We have been producing the Q60 for over a year and Licence money has been paid - who was this licence money paid to? I certainly did not get it. --- More in sorrow I accept the blame for writing QDOS and the consequences, but what have Wolgang Lenerz, Jochen Merz and others done to merit the treatment they are getting - they deserve to keep their fingers. Tony Tebby I think that this says it all really and anyone who has any cause to doubt the honesty of those who have striven to keep SMSQ/E on course should take note. I personally feel I owe a debt of gratitude to TT for all of his work over these years. His enthusiasm on the occasions when we met certainly played a large part in keeping my interest in the QL going. Tony's statements have backed up many of the things that we have been saying over the last few months and should really blow the cobwebs away from those who doubted. Still, given the way some people seem to react, I suppose there will be those who do not believe him either. -- Roy Wood Q Branch, 20 Locks Hill Portslade. Sussex. BN41 2LB. UK Tel : +44 (0)1273 386030 Fax : +44 (0)1273 430501 (New number!) Mobile +44(0)7836 745501 Web : www.qbranch.demon.co.uk
Re: [ql-users] Pirates and mad sheep
Dave P writes: Of course, now he's going to get a bunch of emails from his devotees telling him how wonderful he is. I really should get started on mine, so I have to go now. I already sent mine. Looking forward to read yours ;) Per
