Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> I take it the good Dave has not responded since?
Correct, he hasn't. I will post any new development to the list.
--
Björn
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Björn Stenberg wrote:
Dave,
The screenshots you link to are not "100% identical". They are not even the
same size, nor do they contain the same images.
I take it the good Dave has not responded since?
--
Daniel Stenberg -- http://www.rockbox.org/ -- http://daniel.haxx.
ge-
> From: Björn Stenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 10:08 AM
> To: Dave Haas
> Cc: Rockbox development
> Subject: Re: Remove PluginJewels from RockBox downloads immediately
>
> You wrote:
> > The game PluginJewels, for use on RockBox and
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:44:41 -0700, Steve Garcia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Bluechip wrote:
>
>> If he wants to get stupid about IPR and S/w Patents etc. then let's give
>> hims a run for his money !?
>
>Somebody mentioned small claims court. If it goes to court, this is a
>copyright matter, so
Bluechip wrote:
> If he wants to get stupid about IPR and S/w Patents etc. then let's give
> hims a run for his money !?
Somebody mentioned small claims court. If it goes to court, this is a
copyright matter, so that means Federal court.
If you have an ironclad case in a patent matter, the aver
If the only thing the guy cares about is the graphics why not
just:
A) thrown the problem at the Gwled author
and/or
B) Just change the shapes in some way
Problem is *gone* !?
If he wants to get stupid about IPR and S/w Patents etc. then let's give
hims a run for his money !?
BC
Yeah, I agree tha
Yeah, I agree that doing anything to change ours at the moment is pointless. We shouldn't just say "Screw you" or anything, but no steps/changes should be made to what we have until at least some more discussion has happened between Popcap and us.
On 4/18/06, Paul van der Heu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 21:04:39 -0400, bk wrote:
> If it's just a matter of changing some colors around or something
> else minor I don't see the harm if it means avoiding potentially
> disasterous legal complications.
There's more to it.. IF you 'just change some colors around' you basically
admit
I think it's really important for cooler heads to prevail here.
Although the graphics certainly aren't 100% identical, they do appear
similar from the low res screenshots at first glance. The guy from
Popcap seems willing to engage in a civilized dialog, so let's not burn
that bridge by immediatel
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:49:16 +0200, RaeNye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Maybe add to the wiki and the manual a small-print notice that says
>"this game was NOT developed, published, or officially licensed by by PopCap
>Games"
"There is no relationship between this game and the markedly inferior
im
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:31:57 +0200 (CEST), Daniel Stenberg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Björn Stenberg wrote:
>
>I think we have the law on our side. The images are not copied from their game
>and they aren't identical, as anyone can see. The only claim they could make
>would
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:32:42 +0200, Björn Stenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Regarding your question below, the gem graphics in the color image of
>PluginJewels as seen at
>http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/pub/Main/PluginJewels/jewelscolor.png , are
>identical to the graphics seen in versions of
On 4/18/06, Paul Louden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not suggesting throwing them to the dogs, but really how much can we say
> either way when we didn't create the artwork in question? At the very least
> *we* should contact the creator of Gweled and let him know what's going on,
> in case he'
I'm not suggesting throwing them to the dogs, but really how much can we say either way when we didn't create the artwork in question? At the very least *we* should contact the creator of Gweled and let him know what's going on, in case he's next in line, and see if he has anything helpful. Though
On 4/18/06, Paul Louden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it might be beneficial to take the highest resolution version of
> each of our individual Jewels (the wonderful tiled BMP we've already got)
> and the screenshot he provided with, cut up his jewels to align with ours,
> and send that one
I think it might be beneficial to take the highest resolution version of each of our individual Jewels (the wonderful tiled BMP we've already got) and the screenshot he provided with, cut up his jewels to align with ours, and send that one image back with them exactly side by side so the difference
Adam wrote:
Might it be a good idea to email the author of Gweled ...
I believe Gweled already packaged with Ubuntu (and maybe other linux
distros).
Well, it's not installed by default with Ubuntu, but is available as a
downloadable package.
The description from Ubuntu's "synaptic" package i
rom: Keith Mosher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 18 April 2006 17:30
> To: Rockbox development
> Subject: Re: Remove PluginJewels from RockBox downloads immediately
>
> This sounds like a very reasonabe idea that should make them unique beyond a
> doubt but still keep the good gem
ny?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 6:44 PM
To: 'Rockbox development'
Subject: RE: Remove PluginJewels from RockBox downloads immediately
Imho, a modification of the images at thi
t term, and could be
misconstrued as a sign of guilt if referenced to in the future.
-Original Message-
From: Keith Mosher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 April 2006 17:30
To: Rockbox development
Subject: Re: Remove PluginJewels from RockBox downloads immediately
This sounds like a very reason
This sounds like a very reasonabe idea that should make them unique
beyond a doubt but still keep the good gem designs intact.
On 4/18/06, ian douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The only thing is that the existing jewels are really good-looking and
> > it would be a pity to replace them with a
IMO ... he sortof realizes he basically has no case
Yeah:
"if these color graphics do not actually appear"
"if the screenshot above is representative"
"If that is the case"
"If that is indeed the case"
"If it is not the case"
Lots of 'if' statements, like he hasn't really done his homework. He
Original Message-
From: ian douglas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 18 April 2006 16:53
To: Rockbox development
Subject: Re: Remove PluginJewels from RockBox downloads immediately
> The only thing is that the existing jewels are really good-looking and
> it would be a pity to replace th
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:31:57 +0200 (CEST), Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> However, I don't think we'd loose anything by being "soft" and
> simply modify our jewels somewhat so that they don't look so
> similar to their versions, just to be nice.
IMO it is obvious from the last response form 'PopCap Dave
The only thing is that the existing jewels are really good-looking and
it would be a pity to replace them with a set that aren't at least as nice.
What about just exchanging the colors?
ie: make the white jewels blue, the blue ones green, the green ones
orange, etc.
I'd think that'd be enoug
On 4/18/06, Daniel Stenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, I don't think we'd loose anything by being "soft" and simply modify
> our jewels somewhat so that they don't look so similar to their versions, just
> to be nice.
I pretty much agree with Daniel on this. Out of curiosity I threw bot
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Björn Stenberg wrote:
I think we have the law on our side. The images are not copied from their game
and they aren't identical, as anyone can see. The only claim they could make
would be that our images are "too similar" to theirs and thus could be
considered plagiarism. T
s this confusion.
>
> Best,
> Dave
>
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Björn Stenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 10:08 AM
> To: Dave Haas
> Cc: Rockbox development
> Subject: Re: Remove PluginJewels from RockBox downloads im
I think he has a point to make about the similarities between the graphics (though ours look much nicer), but I don't know what he's getting at by saying the jewels are in the same position...Anyway, it seems like he's willing to leave us alone if we just change the graphics, which shouldn't be too
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:32:42 +0200, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Here is Daves reply to my question. I have not replied back to him
> yet.
> Regarding your question below, the gem graphics in the color image
> of PluginJewels as seen at
> http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/pub/Main/PluginJewels/jewelscolor.p
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 14:32:42 +0200
Björn Stenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is Daves reply to my question. I have not replied back to him yet.
> Regarding your question below, the gem graphics in the color image of
> PluginJewels as seen at
> http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/pub/Main/Plugin
Cc: Rockbox development
Subject: Re: Remove PluginJewels from RockBox downloads immediately
You wrote:
> The game PluginJewels, for use on RockBox and available at
> http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/PluginJewels, is a blatant
> copyright violation of Bejeweled, the popular match-t
Christopher Woods wrote:
> @ Björn or anybody else concerned, has there been any further action in
> this?
No. I will post to the list if/when anything happens.
--
Björn
@ Björn or anybody else concerned, has there been any further action in
this?
Christopher
Why not something along the lines of:
--
Dear mr Haas,
Please stop sending us unsolicited commercial e-mail messages or we will
be forced to take legal action.
--
I think it has more legal merit than his claim :-)
/Anders
Exactly, they are not claiming any sort of trademark infringment, only
copyright. There is absolutely no need to bring trademarks into this.
>From Christopher Wood's earlier post it's clear that the only thing
they could claim copyright infringment on would be "sufficient amount
of literary or pic
In adversarial situations such as this, it is usually best to give as
little information as possible. You never know when your adversary can
find a way to turn something around and use it against you. For
example, your statement below can be viewed as an admission that you/we
*were* violating
you should have also mentioned that it was once named bejewelled and
changed very recenlty to jewled because u take copyright and trademark
and stuff seriously..
On 16/04/06, Björn Stenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You wrote:
> > The game PluginJewels, for use on RockBox and available at
> > ht
You wrote:
> The game PluginJewels, for use on RockBox and available at
> http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/PluginJewels, is a blatant
> copyright violation of Bejeweled, the popular match-three game owned by
> my company, PopCap Games, Inc., of Seattle, Washington, USA. I am
> writing to
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 09:39:48PM -0400, bk wrote:
> How can they say there are copyright violations? Clearly none of the
> code is theirs since the Rockbox code is open and their game is
> proprietary, and the plugin author didn't copy any graphics, right?
>
> There's no trademark violations an
On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 21:39 -0400, bk wrote:
> How can they say there are copyright violations? Clearly none of the
> code is theirs since the Rockbox code is open and their game is
> proprietary, and the plugin author didn't copy any graphics, right?
>
> There's no trademark violations any more
How can they say there are copyright violations? Clearly none of the
code is theirs since the Rockbox code is open and their game is
proprietary, and the plugin author didn't copy any graphics, right?
There's no trademark violations any more after the name change. I don't
see how they can have an
On 4/15/06, Dominik Riebeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just received the following mail today -- I guess because I recently
> edited the wiki page (at least it shows me as the last editor of the
> page up to now) and my mail address can be found on the wiki. I'm
> somewhat unsure
43 matches
Mail list logo
