Please remove

2002-03-11 Thread Johnna Teare
The list has cooled...

Just a quick thought - if anybody is updating their SAM websites in the next
few millenium, please remove any links to anything that I once had up on the
web. It's now all gone and it won't be going back up.

The sites were located at the following:

www.yi.com/home/TeareJohnna

www.theunstoppablesexmachine.freeserve.co.uk

www.johnnateare.co.uk

Only a very minor thing, I know, but I'd be greatful thanks.

Cheers,

Johnna



Re: FW: In response to Andrew

2002-03-11 Thread Andrew Collier


On Monday, March 11, 2002, at 02:23  pm, Matthew J Craven wrote:


Only if he has not sold/copied/gave 1 copy away , after either has
happened he owes regardless


Obviously!


And if they where bothered , they would sue for each amount they could
have made+their charges to Sue


Indeed, they could.


No they could not. Let's just get one thing straight - Amstrad have 
already made a public statement that the Spectrum ROM may be copied 
freely for use in zero-cost Spectrum emulators. They could, in theory, 
revoke that right tomorrow, but they can't sue for anything done under 
the terms of the existing agreement.



So taking the second option is 2 late after you have commited the act
, soz . but thats law


Yes, it would be too late to not pay if I had copied copyrighted 
material without permission, but that isn't what's going on here.


Andrew

--
 ---Andrew Collier
    http://mnemotech.ucam.org/  ---
  --
r<2+ T<4* cSEL dMS hEn/CB1.1.4




Re: FW: In response to Andrew

2002-03-11 Thread Matthew J Craven
> Only if he has not sold/copied/gave 1 copy away , after either has
> happened he owes regardless

Obviously!

> And if they where bothered , they would sue for each amount they could
> have made+their charges to Sue

Indeed, they could.

> So taking the second option is 2 late after you have commited the act
> , soz . but thats law


RE: F16 Combat Pilot download

2002-03-11 Thread Frode Tennebø
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002 18:56:56 - "Simon Owen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Still, I've created a DSK image from it, which I've just uploaded to
> /incoming on NVG.  It's now up to Frode to move it somewhere you can all
> get at it...

ftp://ftp.nvg.ntnu.no/pub/sam-coupe/demos/games

Ohand stop the bickering on the list, please!

 -Frode



RE: FW: In response to Andrew

2002-03-11 Thread Adrian Brown
Programmers, Spelling - hmm dont those words cancel each other out

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 10 March 2002 19:53
To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
Subject: Re: FW: In response to Andrew


Just curious, do you have dyslexia?
Does your spelling ever get in the way when you're programming?

Frans

> 
> Oh they Care allright ( i had a nice chat with Eidos(own's Domark)
> after i released my stuff ) , never did with Dma/Sony over lemmings
> thought. I think it also help me inb the fact that i once worked for
> Domark after doing Sam Version :)
> 
> But i won on the contract i had with SamCo/Domark/Me , Basicly the
> Copyrighted Code for Sam version reverted to me after five years (and
> beens as it was Hand crafted and not ported) , i could do as i wished.
> The Gfx was all mine to (Except for the Loading screen done by Neil
> Holmes). And beens as i was not gaining any money (Hense it can only be
> sold via a NON PROFIT MAKING COMPANY) , i was in the clear.
> 
> Lemming could be an interesting one , as Gfx was direct from Dma (touch
> up/Modified by Doug Holmes) , but beens as Sony(own's psygnosis) holds
> the contracts (if they are still in force) , or Dma would/have become
> the full owners by know , but there is no intent to defraud. Or
> Devaluate a ageing product , infact i hope its helps peeps who want to
> know how to code or sifted though it and found usefull bits to help
> peeps on.
> 
> I have (IMHO) legimently release what is mine ( contract with
> Fred/Dma/Psygnosis/Samco/Domark expired after five years , with all the
> Sam code copyright referring to me, and Gfx to the artists & Music to
> the Musician ), and i have left all copyrights intack (visable) , and i
> also acknoledge them.
> 
> All i can say is ,
> 
> 1. If you have no right to release , post , upload then your on your
> own (i have been over zelious on this from time to time , and peeps
> have rightly ( but maybe over agressivly ) , Objected. Tip - try saying
> "I own thoose please remove" - instead of "Who the F**K has upload all
> copyright material, and then go into atack mode"
> 
> 2. If you do post/upload copyright material , be prepared to answer
> why.
> 
> 3. If you own it do what you like , but be carefull on TM & (R) as they
> are inforcable for 100's of years
> 
> 4. Don't try my route , I have just been lucky
> 
> Nearly the last point for everyone to take note is Ultimate (RARE) ,
> they refuse anyone to release upload/down any of there old titles (some
> obscure intelli law) , unless its packed in the method they choose (i,e
> as you would dload it from thier site) , if your found to have unzipped
> + added or removed anything you have violate their rights and you will
> be knobled.
> 
> But , this is the biggy , you can upload/download what you want , till
> u get caught. Then your into a whole new world , this one saw's in this
> order
> 
> 1. Benifit of the doubt , ask them to remove. Also ask how much it's
> cost you (In Sam's case this is 0.00 + Vat) 2. Failure on above by
> poster/holder, so seek legal if have Copyright/Tm/R, Else go sulk 3.
> Failure on above by poster/holder, old bill court , no computers etc
> etc etc
> 
> So you all be carefull out there :)
> 
> C
> 
> Ps I still am unable to spell correctly, and can be totally not arshed
> to use M$ spell/gramma checker :)
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of Fred Bloggs
> Sent: 08 March 2002 22:10
> To: sam-users@nvg.ntnu.no
> Subject: In response to Andrew
> 
> 
>>On Friday 08 Mar 2002 6:36 pm, Andrew Collier wrote:
> 
>> > Did you read my last post in response to sarcasm?!! It most 
>> > definitely
>>was
>> > NOT directed at the copyright holders of old games.
>>
>>Then who else *was* it directed at?
> 
> IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE IRONY OF SUCH A SITUATION, I'M NOT GOING TO
>  EXPLAIN WHAT WAS ESSENTIALLY A LIGHT HEARTED SARCASTIC COMMENT.
> 
>>"I know - once we've cracked how to get it up and running why don't we 
>>sell it Persona for charity purposes"
>>
>> > >Just because you can download games for other systems, doesn't make
> 
>> > >it legal. You mentioned JetPac, and Ultimate are one of the 
>> > >companies who  most viciously protect their old Spectrum games: you
> 
>> > >didn't find
>>JetPac
>> > > at World Of Spectrum.
>> >
>> > Correct! I never said I did!!!
>>
>>So why should the Sam's copyright-holders let you download their 
>>software, based on the unauthorized and illegal availability of that 
>>particular title?
> 
> SO WHY DOES CHRIS WHITE DO THIS WITH PRINCE OF PERSIA THEN?
> 
>> > >I think the point is that people on this list only want to point 
>> > >out download sites which respect the wishes of the copyright owner.
> 
>> > >If that wish is that some money goes to charity every time somebody
> 
>> > >gets a
>>game,
>> > >then it's their right to say so and you should respect it too.
>> >
>