#Slimeballs and Thieves
19 messages in this thread
I've tried to provide software that works (mostly) at a fair price. A
price that will probably be saved in just one or two months in decreased
connect time. I've provided a usable demo of the program, so that if you don't
want to register it and can live with the guilt screens, you should feel free
to do so.
Even in this environment, the thieves come out of the woodwork. So, I'm
asking you, what should I do? Should I ask the sysops here to lock the thieves
out? Should I list the names of those that I have email proof of? Should I
file civil suit? (You can bet I'll be doing that!).
One of the thieves is a sysop from another network. You better believe I
won't port the program for that network!
So, what action should I take? Public or private?
Best,
-jcs-
Jim,
List their names.
Don
All right, if you're going to make accusations let's at least get the truth
out.
Someone uploaded Whap to People/Link and said it was a new "1.4 demo
version."
I downloaded it from our Sysop approval area to see what it was. I had
tried an earlier demo version of your program. I had not registered it.
When I ran this new version it sent an email message to you which, at 2400
baud, scrolled by so quickly in its small window I could not see what it
said.
You replied to me in email that I had the choice of either registering the
program, being locked out of the AmigaForums, or seeing you in court.
Now you accuse me of pirating your program, unless of course you mean some
"sysop" from some "other" network.
What you should in fact be doing is going after whoever spread the version
of your program that was already registered, and that person was most
certainly not me. It was uploaded to People/Link by a user of unknown
identity and it has since been deleted from our libraries. It was never
made available for public consumption.
I explained all of this to you quite clearly in email and yet you still
insist on making these accusations in public.
The truth will out. My conscience is clear. I had not registered your
program and so I did not know what a registered version was supposed to
look like.
The string which appeared in the menu bar of the program was also supplied
to you in email. With that you can track the sourced of the piracy.
The fact that this copy of Whap contained the string "Sysop" on its menu
bar should also indicate something to you. If you have a special
Compuserve Sysop version of your program then it obviously got away from
whoever that copy was assigned to and it is THAT person not me to whom you
should be addressing your accusations and threats.
One more time for the history books: this program was uploaded to Plink by
an anonymous member. It has been deleted. I ran it to see what it was.
You've threatened me with legal action. I believe I'm owed an apology.
Just wait a minute Harv!
I happened to upload Whap to PLINK a few weeks ago and you never made
it public! The version I uploaded there was the original arc file I downloaded
from CIS. I uploaded it to Plink with my account OCS161. It was a CLEAN demo
version of Whap before you got your hands on it. For all of those interested
here is Harv's reply to me about my upload.
————————–
Date 9/01/88 20:38
From CBM*HARV
Subj WHAP.ARC
Num 1
————————–
TO: OCS161
Dear OCS (you can get your ID personalized by typing /GO HELP ID from
anywhere on Plink, unless of course you don't want to 🙂
Thanks for your upload of WHAP.ARC.
However [ahem, clearing throat] this program is obviously Compu$erve-
specific and as such we'd prefer not to approve it into the AmigaZone
Club for public consumption. Since the program is available on the
Amiga areas of CI$ and is heavily plugged there in entry bulletins and
the only real reason why it exists is so that people will use it a lot
and thus use CI$ more often, it would be counter-productive to our goals
to have it in our library… the same reason why we don't have
GEnie's "Air Warrior" game here, and CI$ doesn't have our ACO program
Press <RETURN> for more:
over there.
Commercial computer-entertainment/info networks are in stiff competition
with each other – we are all basically fighting for the same user-dollars.
If the authors of WHAP would like to contact us about doing a version
for People/Link we'd be pleased as punch to talk to them. We'll help
them learn anything they need to know about all the nuances of using
People/Link…the entire advanced command structure, all the available
areas, how the Club notice and library sections work, etc. etc…. but
since CI$ is really the only place this program is usable at this point
in time, we'd prefer not to have it in our library.
I trust you understand. Your upload was FREE of connect time charges.
By the way – I see you don't have a User Directory listing. If by some
chance YOU are "Jim Stevens" why don't you give me a call. 🙂
Regards, Harv Laser
AmigaZone Chairman
CC: CBM*HARV
Harv,
Having just gotten off the phone with you, something I should have done in
the first place, I apologize for typing first and thinking later.
I'm still not clear on exactly what happened. From your explanation, it did
happen. Neither one of us has been able to duplicate it. It appears it was an
irreproducible artifact of crossing versions. I'm sure there was nothing
sinister or nefarious involved.
public!
Publish. Hangin's to good for 'em.
Hi Jim,i'd make it pretty plain to all of the other users here,the names of the
scumbags that want to be so tight-ars*d not to pay a measly $US40,for a program
that'd save them at least that! I just can't believe that it is a sysop of
another network that is responsible for this. Actually i'd see if the sysop's
here could deny them access to these forums,not nice,but they're not really
nice in what they have done!
C u laitr
Brendan Pratt – Queensland,Australia.
Beautiful one day,
Perfect the next!
Jim,
Publish the names of those who use a pirated version.
Kurt
I sincerely hope that Mr. Stevens treads lightly in the naming of names
in regards of who is using "pirated" version of his program.
Being an accessory after the fact is one thing, downloading what was
assumed to be a legitimate file from somewhere is totally something else.
There is sufficient precedent to show that that sort of things happens on
many systems: CIS, GEnie, Plink, you name it. The responsibility for such
actions falls into a very fine line.
I, for one, would be more than upset if my name was published as being a
"pirate", especially if I was using a Shareware product such as this in
what I thought was in a legitimate way. As a matter of fact, my next call
would be to my lawyer and I assure you, cost would not matter since I would
win the case. [He says confidently.]
Hey, bottom line is that someone screwed up and made a mistake. You don't
cut off your nose to spite your face and the Plink Sysop screwed up. It
would be Mr. Steven's burden of proof that he used this program maliciously
and all I can see is that he used it a few times, no matter what the
circumstances.
Like some people have said before, go after the real pirates in this issue
and not the persons who were drawn into it after the fact. The mere fact
that control of a registered program (and the User ID and PW therein) was
allowed to be uploaded somewhere indicates it was that owner who is the one
that is responsible. The trickle-down effect and the receivers of that
program, WITHOUT MALICIOUS INTENT, used it, cannot be labeled as pirates.
Look at it this way: It could have been a HELL of a lot worse if the wrong
sort of people got their hands on it. Everyone is fortunate that it was
nipped in the bud early enough.
If people are going to go on a witch hunt, I highly recommend that the
hunters are very confident of their quary….
— Tom
Tom,
One thing you overlooked; it's not shareware. It's a copyrighted commercial
program.
Due to the nature of the beast, it is very easy for the author to determine
if the the copy being used has been diddled with. A single use of
something obviously pirated is not to be jumped on, but continued use of it
is.
Mr. Stevens has been pursuing the matter in a very acceptable fashion,
contacting the offending parties through Email, and giving them fair notice
of his intentions. The party has a choice to 'fess up and register, or
have his name exposed to public.
I find it somewhat revealing that the original description of the offenders
included "a sysop of another national [information] service" without
revealing any names, and a message from a certain sysop was soon seen
screaming blue-bloody murder about character assasination. A calmer
approach would have been a offer to help in tracking down the actual
(possibly non-existant in this case) pirate.
Whap is distributed as a commercial program which is freely redistibutable
in it's Demo form. If someone is not familiar with Whap!, how is he to
know that it is the demo version? How is he to know it is commercial?
Saying "a sysop of another national information service" pretty much
narrows it down to a couple of people. I don't see anything wrong with
Harv's saying that he is the suspect, which he obviously is.
…Steve
And since censorship has so recently been a topic here, here's a little
known fact: Last night some time, Jim Meyers (I think that's his name)
posted a message explaining how to get the "Hidden" message in the program,
and how to decode it. I guess Jim Stevens didn't want others to know that
someone had found his secret code, and revealed it himself?
I'm curious as to why the message was killed. Especially since it relates
to a commercial program wihch was supposedly NOT written by a CIS sysop.
(Or so we were led to believe for some reason)
Oops, just noticed I'm replying to my own message. 😎
…Steve
I think we'll be finding out soon…
Steve,
See message 12285. There is no reason for innuedo.
I'm suprised that NY*Jim, or anyone else, didn't found the requester,
and went to all the trouble of dumping and decrypting. I guess some people
have strange passtimes.
Whap! was written by myself and Jim Nangano. Jim is not a sysop. To
be more specific, Jim wrote Whap!, I wrote View!. Several other people
were involved including GreG Tsadilas. The program is 'published' by ATI,
which is a legal entity in the state of Colorado.
-sja
I think Mr. Laser had already offered and rendered some help in tracking down
the perpetrator(s). Tho I must admit I'm a little in the dark about the whole
matter. This has obviously been going on for a short time via private mail.
-msl-
Tom,
I sincerely hope that Jim publishes the names of those who are using
registered versions of his program without paying for them.
Anyone using Whap! can clearly see Jim's "credit lines". I can't see how
anyone can claim not to know that Whap! is not PD.
I, for one, do not wish to see the publication of any names. At this point,
it would be merely for the amusement of some of the readers of this SIG — a
sort of morbid curiosity. After all, what would the readers do with this
information?
ATI has every right to legally pursue this matter and if there is enough of a
civil case against them, I assume they'll go after them. However, unlike some
here, I still aspire to the "innocent until proven guilty" principle of our
legal system. To do anything less would be a very irresponsible act on their
part.
Once a suit is filed in civil court, it becomes a matter of public record and
ATI can get as much publicity mileage out of it as they care to do. The SPA and
ADAPSO do it all of the time. But, until then, it is only so much
finger-pointing and witch-hunting as far as I'm concerned. If it is indeed a
serious violation of ATI's copyright, then do it right. Take em to court.
— Tom