Tulip ready to bring Commodore and C64 back
J. Robertson
myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link:
http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also
www.commodore.net):
Here's the article for those without broswer capability (Matthew):
Tulip also states in article they're not happy with several sites who
commercialy use the Commodore name and logo.
***
Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE
PARTNERS LIMITED
Amersfoort, July 11, 2003
Today Tulip Computers NV (Tulip) and Ironstone Partners Ltd.
(Ironstone) signed a licence agreement for a partnership, which is a
major step in the global re-launch of the Commodore brand name.
Tulip will receive a license fee for all Commodore C64 products
delivered by Ironstone, installed on all computer brands using the
Microsoft or any other operating system and all Commodore 64 branded
products. In addition, Tulip will receive a license fee over the
revenue from software downloads, subscriptions and advertising.
Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million loyal
Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world. This community is
currently spread over hundreds of unofficial websites. The community
craves acknowledgement and authenticity from the true Commodore C64
brand. Tulip is the owner of the brand name Commodore. Through this
partnership Tulip grants to Ironstone the exclusive rights to exploit
the official Commodore C64 web-portal and use of the Commodore 64
brand name.
Ironstone and Tulip invite the Commodore community to join the
official Commodore C64 web-portal. Currently there are about 300
commercial websites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64
without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorised
use of the Commodore brand.
In this partnership, Ironstone will create the official Commodore C64
games and community portal designed to focus and harness the power of
the Commodore C64 user base and to efficiently provide the services
required by these individuals for a fee. The founders of Ironstone are
experienced and successful, in previous similar projects Ironstone
achieved a subscriber to pay subscriber conversion rate that was
unparalleled in the Internet space.
The main objective of the Ironstone official C64 portal is to unite
this massive global fan base of passionate enthusiasts. Through its
web portal, Ironstone will market the official C64 emulator in various
software and hardware formats. The games offered by the Ironstone
web-portal will include the famous classic C64 games as well as
exciting new games and will also sell its Commodore-branded products
through the site.
Tulip will get full access to the estimated 6 million users and will
also sell its Commodore branded products through this portal. Tulip
will introduce, the upcoming months, new hardware products under the
Commodore brand name, being able to use the C64 emulator.
According to Bjorn Bruggeman, Brand Manager Commodore: Through
strategic partnerships we're creating a web of Commodore partner
companies. Each partner, or licensee, is selected on his unique
expertise and will focus on a specific market segment within the
Commodore strategy. The synergy advantages are huge. The license
agreement with Ironstone is an important step in this process and will
enable Tulip to enter a complete new era with almost unlimited
e-commerce opportunities.
Darren Melbourne, Creative Director, Ironstone Partners commented, “
The license deal with Tulip is a huge breakthrough for the millions of
C64 enthusiasts and retro gamers around the world who are still loyal
to this incredible games system. Ironstone is committed to bringing
this technology and games library back to prominence on every platform
available to us.
Commodore C64 facts and figures
* The C64 is the biggest selling home computer in world history.
* The C64 has an unparalleled heritage as a groundbreaking games and
home use PC.
* The C64’s role in the evolution of the modern games industry was
incredible powerful and the echoes of its influence still reverberate
through the industry today.
* Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million
loyal Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world.
* A countless number of hobbyists and Commodore enthusiast have kept
the community alive. An Internet search on Commodore is still good for
about 50,000 hits.
* Currently there are about 300 commercial websites that use the name
Commodore or Commodore 64.
* Over 6000 games have been created for the C64.
* The brand awareness of the Commodore logo is still one of highest in
the industry.
About Tulip Computers
Tulip Computers (Tulip) is a European A-brand computer manufacturer
and has grown to become an internationally renown, market leading
company. Being founded in 1979, Tulip has been active in the computer
industry for more than 20 years and is one of the most experienced
computer manufacturers in the world. Indeed, since 1981, Tulip has
developed its own computers, pioneered by its own Research &
Development department in dedicated Tulip manufacturing plants.
Tulip head-office is located in Amersfoort (the Netherlands), as is
the helpdesk, technical department and notebook production line. The
Tulip head-office is also responsible for the General Management,
Research & Development and Marketing & Communication on world wide
level. Tulip owns sales offices in the Netherlands, Germany and Spain.
Besides these offices, Tulip works closely together with the in 2002
privatised Tulip sales offices in the Benelux, France, Italy and the
UK. In addition, Tulip has joint ventures with distributors in
countries where it does not have its own sales offices.
Tulip offers a comprehensive product range, which is ideally suited to
meet the requirements of the professional, educational, medical, SME
and retail markets. Tulip product lines include a wide range of
servers, desktops, notebooks under brand name Tulip and communication
products under brand names Dynalink and Conceptronic. Tulip has
acquired Commodore in 1997. With Commodore, Tulip owns a strong brand
name that includes a wide range of multi media products and mobile
computing. The emphasis in this consumer oriented product line is on
retail sales. In addition, other Commodore ICT products are marketed
under the Commodore brand by a number of licencees.
Tulip Computers is an international IT supplier that integrates
servers, deskbound computers, notebooks and communication products in
a total solution for the IT user. Tulip's shares have been traded on
the Euronext stock exchange since 1984.
About Ironstone Partners
Ironstone Partners Ltd is a commercial vehicle created and funded by a
number of individuals with a combined experience of over 100 years in
the global games and media industries. With Offices in the UK and
Canada, Ironstone has been created to pursue strategic and speculative
games opportunities outside the remit of the current focus of the
large games industry companies.
Ironstone Partners owns an extensive portfolio of games I.P.R. and is
always willing to discuss interesting propositions in the games and
media space.
For further information please contact Danielle Woodyatt or Kat Osman
at Lunch PR on 020 7633 0633 or email (firstname)@lunchpr.com
If you wish to contact Ironstone Partners please send an email to
in...@ironstonepartners.com
More information
Tulip Computers International B.V.
P.O. Box 150
3800 AD Amersfoort
The Netherlands
T +31 (0)33 4549300
F +31 (0)33 4549400
E pr...@tulip.com
Jason
--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jk...@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
Jason Petersen
> Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE
> PARTNERS LIMITED
So, their plan is to sell c64 emulators and old games, and to probably
try and shut down web sites that use "their" IP. Pardon me if I'm not
thrilled..
--
Jason
J. Robertson
wrote:
Exactly. I'm not thrilled for the same reason either.
White Flame (aka David Holz)
news:3gpugvcftta9sks1g...@4ax.com...
> Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million loyal
> Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world.
I'd like to see where they got this number from.
> The community
> craves acknowledgement and authenticity from the true Commodore C64
> brand.
Not really. We just want to be kept aware of the legalities surrounding the
64 so that we can pursue our hobby without large corps getting in our way.
> Tulip is the owner of the brand name Commodore. Through this
> partnership Tulip grants to Ironstone the exclusive rights to exploit
> the official Commodore C64 web-portal and use of the Commodore 64
> brand name.
The Commodore 64 brand hasn't been protected/enforced in years. IIRC, US
trademark law requires you to pursue retaining exclusive use, etc, or else
your trademark becomes defunct. Does international law or the Netherland's
law have the same stipulation?
> Ironstone and Tulip invite the Commodore community to join the
> official Commodore C64 web-portal. Currently there are about 300
> commercial websites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64
> without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorised
> use of the Commodore brand.
So Tulip seeks to tear down the infrastructure of those who contribute the
most to the C64 community. Obviously, anybody who gets a notification from
Tulip regarding this will not be peachy-keen friends with Tulip. It doesn't
take a rocket scientist to figure out what the ramifications of that action
in a niche market such as ours will be.
> In this partnership, Ironstone will create the official Commodore C64
> games and community portal designed to focus and harness the power of
> the Commodore C64 user base and to efficiently provide the services
> required by these individuals for a fee. The founders of Ironstone are
> experienced and successful, in previous similar projects Ironstone
> achieved a subscriber to pay subscriber conversion rate that was
> unparalleled in the Internet space.
There's a decent portion of C64 users that stick with it because it's what
they have, and they don't have much cash to spend on other fancy new
computers. I doubt they can squeeze a lot out of us. Heck, $150-300 for
computer upgrade equipment isn't that bad of a price and offers a C64 a far
better price/performance ratio than a $150-300 PC upgrade, and that's the
range that CMD was selling in. There's still tons of C64 users out there
without anything more than a joystick and a 1541.
> The main objective of the Ironstone official C64 portal is to unite
> this massive global fan base of passionate enthusiasts.
Blah blah blah. The main objective of any company is to make money. Why do
business try to disguise this in a thin veneer of "let us help you out of
the goodness of our heart"?
> Through its
> web portal, Ironstone will market the official C64 emulator in various
> software and hardware formats.
Time to get the disassemblers out and see if their emulator uses VICE source
code without releasing source.
> Tulip
> will introduce, the upcoming months, new hardware products under the
> Commodore brand name, being able to use the C64 emulator.
Yay! More Web.it's! :)
> The synergy advantages are huge. The license
> agreement with Ironstone is an important step in this process and will
> enable Tulip to enter a complete new era with almost unlimited
> e-commerce opportunities.
I can feel the paradigm shifting already!
You know, there's nothing wrong with making money. People need it to live
in our society, and businesses need it to operate. But all this smoke and
mirrors about brand loyalty and community gathering seems to be just a bunch
of plastic smiles put up by somebody trying to justify the expense of
purchasing a brand name that hasn't gained them much. This does not go over
well with a niche market that's loyal to a defunct brand. *sigh*
--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)
Kate Slaminko
"J. Robertson" wrote:
> Saw this mentioned on amiga.org then went to investigate it for
> myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link:
> http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also
> www.commodore.net):
>
> Here's the article for those without broswer capability (Matthew):
>
> Tulip also states in article they're not happy with several sites who
> commercialy use the Commodore name and logo.
>
> ***
>
> Global re-launch of COMMODORE by TULIP COMPUTERS N.V. and IRONSTONE
> PARTNERS LIMITED
Let me know when they start making replacement SID chips - I can always
use some of those. And if they don't know how to produce SIDs, then they
aren't really Commodore, no matter what the lawyers say.
-Ron
Matthew Montchalin
|Amersfoort, July 11, 2003
Amersfoort? Tsk! About as valid as Peking, China.
|Today Tulip Computers NV (Tulip) and Ironstone Partners Ltd.
|(Ironstone) signed a licence agreement for a partnership,
Tsk. They surely know how to file articles of partnership in a
state recognizing that sort of thing if they really want to be
considered a 'partnership.'
|which is a major step in the global re-launch of the Commodore brand
|name.
As though I wanted to buy a PC compatible just to get a Tulip
brand computer.
|Tulip will receive a license fee for all Commodore C64 products
|delivered by Ironstone,
Never heard of them. Is Ironstone going to sell them the Brooklyn
Bridge, too?
|installed on all computer brands using the Microsoft or any other
|operating system and all Commodore 64 branded products. In addition,
|Tulip will receive a license fee over the revenue from software
|downloads, subscriptions and advertising.
Rest assured that Tulip guarantees a refund to customers that
mistakenly buy their PC compatibles, when they really wanted
to buy a bona fide Commodore system.
J. Robertson
<krs...@netscape.net> wrote:
>Let me know when they start making replacement SID chips - I can always
>use some of those. And if they don't know how to produce SIDs, then they
>aren't really Commodore, no matter what the lawyers say.
Don't hold your breath over it. ;-)
Marc Walters
> myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link:
> http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also
> www.commodore.net):
>
> commercialy use the Commodore name and logo.
As long as the brand name and logo is not used to identify the site, there
shouldn't be too much trouble. Besides, they would be unwise to alienate the
C64 community and incur a backlash that would be detrimental to their
exploitation of this (very) niche market.
I guess that they intend to push portable consumer devices (handheld
computers, etc) that feature small screens that the low-res C64 games would
run nicely on. There are many classics (Boulderdash comes to mind) that
would be wonderful for mobile gaming.
The fact that Commodore dumped us in the early 1990's before their demise
has meant that C64 users have not relied on an "official" Commodore presence
for more than a decade. Ironstone will have to be aware of this if they wish
to work with us.
But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64 hobbyists -
they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing market with a
ready source of classic games that require a minimum of computing resources
and development.
I'm a bit cynical about their plans to support the C64 community though. The
clamp-down on unauthorised download sites is necessary to secure the
viability of the software they will licence and sell. Any plans to actually
support C64 users may just be an attempt to allay the fears of a community
they probably don't really want or need.
But, I'm willing to take a chance with them since they might be willing to
place a large wad of cash in the hands of Commodore 64 developers to create
new products "tuned" to whatever platform they will ultimately run on. As a
result, I'll be one of the first to stick my hand out. :-) Hey, stop
pushing back there - Get in line!
Marc Walters
Anders Carlsson
Hopefully, Tulip would do something similar like Amstrad did with
Sinclair; making the firmware ROMs legal for emulator use, and then
later developing own products (like the e-m@iler) with licensed games
for making own money.
Speaking of software, Commodore themselves didn't do too many exciting
titles after 1983, so the question is what software Tulip will have
access to and whether they are willing to buy licenses from all the
big IDSA members. Or maybe they will rely on old inhouse products and
freeware from the user scene?
--
Anders Carlsson
wildstar
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030711...@lab.oregonvos.net:
> Amersfoort? Tsk! About as valid as Peking, China.
>
> Tsk. They surely know how to file articles of partnership in a
> state recognizing that sort of thing if they really want to be
> considered a 'partnership.'
>
> As though I wanted to buy a PC compatible just to get a Tulip
> brand computer.
> Never heard of them. Is Ironstone going to sell them the Brooklyn
> Bridge, too?
>
> Rest assured that Tulip guarantees a refund to customers that
> mistakenly buy their PC compatibles, when they really wanted
> to buy a bona fide Commodore system.
>
I already sent an email to them. It will likely take a week or two to get
a response as it seems to go through a who entire fucking executive board
meeting session before responding back. I told them that their trademark
rights don't mean shit in the US until they produce sell/market with that
trademark into the US. Until them it is almost a 10 year old defunct
trademark. I also told them that a PC clone with an free emulator with a
plastic C= logo is of any interest to Commodore fan. I am willing to give
them a long session of describing the Commodore scene. (Commodore users
around the world). The Commodore scene is the life-force built on the
contribution of the Commodore users around the world. Tulip hadn't in
about 6 years, had yet to make a real contribution to the "Commodore
scene". (- Commodore users worldwide.) We are the life-force. It may be
interesting if they were to join into the life-force and make a good
contribution. I am willing to contribute money if they were to provide
products that would be contributing to the life-force and continuum of
the Commodore scene. I don't mind them making a few PC models with the
name but making another "Web.it" that claims to be a new Commodore 64
would be kind of a folly. I can see some reasonable marketing directions.
Riccardo Rubini
> Let me know when they start making replacement SID chips - I can
> always use some of those. And if they don't know how to produce
> SIDs, then they aren't really Commodore, no matter what the lawyers
> say. -Ron
I guess it's impossible, as Gateway allegedly owns the patents behind the
SID technology. Tulip owns only the brand name "Commodore".
Riccardo
c64audio
> in our society, and businesses need it to operate. But all this smoke and
> mirrors about brand loyalty and community gathering seems to be just a
bunch
> of plastic smiles put up by somebody trying to justify the expense of
> purchasing a brand name that hasn't gained them much. This does not go
over
> well with a niche market that's loyal to a defunct brand. *sigh*
Fully agreed: there's a discussion also going on (and a contact email
address
to spam) at
http://www.lemon64.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8412
It's a chilling prospect based on Dilbert numbers and a large amount
of commercial cynicism.
Chris
c64audio
But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64 hobbyists -
they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing market with a
ready source of classic games that require a minimum of computing resources
and development.
>>>
assumption
that because they own the Commodore name, they own all the games too, like
Nintendo.
Idiots.
Anyway, if they try and sell C64 games commercially I'm going to hit them
hard
with a bill for the rights to the music, backed up by commercial copyright
organisations.
Chris
Matthew Montchalin
|> Amersfoort? Tsk! About as valid as Peking, China.
<snip>
|> Never heard of them. Is Ironstone going to sell them the Brooklyn
|> Bridge, too?
|>
|> Rest assured that Tulip guarantees a refund to customers that
|> mistakenly buy their PC compatibles, when they really wanted
|> to buy a bona fide Commodore system.
|
|I already sent an email to them.
What for? Until they make a real step forward, and set foot on
US soil, they can do with their business whatever they want to.
|It will likely take a week or two to get a response as it seems to go
|through a who entire fucking executive board meeting session before
|responding back. I told them that their trademark rights don't mean
|shit in the US until they produce sell/market with that trademark into
|the US.
Well, business partners are capable of expanding across national
boundaries into the markets of other nations, and they may have
the desire to do so. So, assuming they actually want to market
a product in the US, they may want to employ a mark that we can
recognize. I'm not so sure they can exclude other Americans from
referring to their products with that very same mark, though. One
of the issues here is exclusivity, another issue is ongoing use
of a mark in all of the markets they are interested in. I don't
think their use of the word 'Commodore' has been continuously
active, and exclusively under their control, from the time the
US Bankruptcy Court disposed of all of Commodore's assets. (Remember,
trademarks are not like ordinary assets, you can't stick them in
your pocket and hide them from the world, lest you lose the very
right that you wished to have.)
|Until them it is almost a 10 year old defunct trademark.
The *activity* of a proprietor of marks in one or more particular markets
can be described with remarkable accuracy, not just in terms of dollars
but in terms of units manufactured and labeled, then packaged and
shipped, from one particular week or month to the next. I don't doubt
that Tulip has been selling loads of PC compatibles with the Commodore
mark slapped on the side, but equating these terms is likely to muddy
the waters when it comes to specifications, and assisting the public
in figuring out what kind of a computer is what.
|I also told them that a PC clone with an free emulator with a plastic
|C= logo is of any interest to Commodore fan.
We don't know that, even if we do happen to agree with that.
|I am willing to give them a long session of describing the Commodore
|scene. (Commodore users around the world). The Commodore scene is the
|life-force built on the contribution of the Commodore users around
|the world. Tulip hadn't in about 6 years, had yet to make a real
|contribution to the "Commodore scene".
um...
|(- Commodore users worldwide.)
Well, regardless of our delusions of grandeur as Americans, we should
be more specific about our markets.
|We are the life-force. It may be interesting if they were to join into
|the life-force and make a good contribution. I am willing to contribute
|money if they were to provide products that would be contributing to
|the life-force and continuum of the Commodore scene. I don't mind them
|making a few PC models with the name but making another "Web.it" that
|claims to be a new Commodore 64 would be kind of a folly.
How many SID chips are inside of a 'Web.it' ?
|I can see some reasonable marketing directions.
hm
Anders Carlsson
> Anyway, if they try and sell C64 games commercially I'm going to
> hit them hard with a bill for the rights to the music, backed up
> by commercial copyright organisations.
I would believe Tulip/Ironstone will seek licenses before trying
to commercially redistribute the same stuff they're willing to try
to prevent pirate distribution of. Most of the companies connected
to IDSA will probably be difficult to convince about the profits to
make the games available (again).
Roughly how many of the companies who denied World of Spectrum
redistribution have made their games available to Amstrad's device?
The biggest houses are the same for C64 and Speccy, so it could be
a good estimate.
--
Anders Carlsson
Riccardo Rubini
> I already sent an email to them. It will likely take a week or two to
> get a response as it seems to go through a who entire fucking
> executive board meeting session before responding back. I told them
> that their trademark rights don't mean shit in the US until they
> produce sell/market with that trademark into the US. Until them it is
> almost a 10 year old defunct trademark.
Rick, I admit I have no valuable knowledge about US federal law, but,
anyway, there is some consistence that eludes me in your reasoning.
Now, regarding the Commodore brand in US...Afair the Commodore trademark has
been used in US for quite a bit by a company called Computer Nationals Inc.,
to sell their PC clones. Their Commodore page, which has always been under
construction, btw - was located at http://www.commodore2000.com , until
March of last year, circa, disappearing shortly thereafter forever.
I have personally never understood if Computer Nationals Inc. was using the
Commodore brand name on behalf of Tulip for the US market.
It's not clear to me if Tulip owns exlcusive worldwide rights to the
Commodore name, but I tend to assume so. Anyway, the Commodore name and logo
have been used in US until last year, so it's not exactly a 10 years old
defunct trademark for the American market.
> I am willing to contribute money if they were to
> provide products that would be contributing to the life-force and
> continuum of the Commodore scene.
The note talks about new games to surface along with these official portal.
Anyway, I can't see any company investing money into serious Commodore 64
development in the XXIII century. I can't help but deny the possibility that
Electronic Arts will develope FIFA 2004 for the C64 after the relaunch.
Speaking of the official software from Tulip, I am personally unsure about
the platform this alleged definitive emulator will run on. We all already
gave for granted it has to be the PC, but I think their target could be
different. Modern cellular phones represent an appetible platform, as well
as Pocket PC's or, say, the Sony Playstation series.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> The note talks about new games to surface along with these official
> portal. Anyway, I can't see any company investing money into serious
> Commodore 64 development in the XXIII century. I can't help but deny
XXIII century...LOL, okay ... XXI century
Riccardo
J. Robertson
wrote:
>trademark. I also told them that a PC clone with an free emulator with a
>plastic C= logo is of any interest to Commodore fan. I am willing to give
No that _isn't_ of any interest to any Commodore fan. Anyone could do
that now you know: PC and emulator. Geez, you weren't here around the
time of the "Commodore 2000" incident but the idea of selling PC's
with an emulator got flamed by people here. In other words no interest
in that whatsoever.
>them a long session of describing the Commodore scene. (Commodore users
>around the world). The Commodore scene is the life-force built on the
Yeah, you're definitely the best person to tell them about the
Commodore community/scene... oh, wait, no you're not!
Riccardo Rubini
> Roughly how many of the companies who denied World of Spectrum
> redistribution have made their games available to Amstrad's device?
> The biggest houses are the same for C64 and Speccy, so it could be
> a good estimate.
I assume that before you commit such an important relaunch, and decide to
invest money in it, you already know your directions and what you're aiming
at. A serious market research had to take place at Tulip before convincing
their chairmen to give this project a try and, of course, some distribution
agreements with software houses had to be in the talks.
Although I have to say that the alleged 6 million users driven Commodore
community reminds me a little of Comical Ali's blurbs :-))
Riccardo
Matthew Montchalin
|Rick, I admit I have no valuable knowledge about US federal law, but,
|anyway, there is some consistence that eludes me in your reasoning.
|
|Now, regarding the Commodore brand in US...Afair the Commodore trademark has
|been used in US for quite a bit by a company called Computer Nationals Inc.,
|to sell their PC clones.
It is also important to inquire into the extent of their *exclusive*
use of the mark.
|Their Commodore page, which has always been under construction, btw -
|was located at http://www.commodore2000.com ,
It makes a difference where the actual webserver is located.
|until March of last year, circa, disappearing shortly thereafter
|forever.
Lack of continuity of control is a major problem with asserting a right
in a trademark.
|I have personally never understood if Computer Nationals Inc. was using
|the Commodore brand name on behalf of Tulip for the US market.
hmmm
|It's not clear to me if Tulip owns exlcusive worldwide rights to the
|Commodore name, but I tend to assume so.
It makes a difference if the public is being served, or if the public
is being harmed. Passing off products that do not execute on 'classic'
Commodore computers might be an example of such a harm.
|Anyway, the Commodore name and logo have been used in US until last
|year, so it's not exactly a 10 years old defunct trademark for the
|American market.
You have to show 'exclusive' use of a mark, not just 'activity'
without an attempt to exclude a competitor from using that mark.
|> I am willing to contribute money if they were to provide products
|> that would be contributing to the life-force and continuum of the
|> Commodore scene.
|
|The note talks about new games to surface along with these official
|portal.
hmm
|Anyway, I can't see any company investing money into serious
|Commodore 64 development in the XXIII century.
Not without a special angle, like colorram being a full 8 bits wide,
for instance. And even given that, it doesn't seem like enough, either.
|I can't help but deny the possibility that Electronic Arts will develope
|FIFA 2004 for the C64 after the relaunch.
|
|Speaking of the official software from Tulip, I am personally unsure
|about the platform this alleged definitive emulator will run on. We
|all already gave for granted it has to be the PC, but I think their
|target could be different. Modern cellular phones represent an appetible
|platform, as well as Pocket PC's or, say, the Sony Playstation series.
A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
it.
Riccardo Rubini
> A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
> pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
> could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
> it.
Give a look :
http://www.amstrad.com/emailer_plus.html
Is this what you had in mind, in a Commodore 64 fashion ? :-)
Riccardo
Michael J. Schülke
> Matthew Montchalin wrote:
>
> > A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
> > pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
> > could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
> > it.
>
> Give a look :
>
> http://www.amstrad.com/emailer_plus.html
>
though you know his PC crashes every time he tries to access the web...
;-)
SCNR,
Michael
Cameron Kaiser
>As long as the brand name and logo is not used to identify the site, there
>shouldn't be too much trouble. Besides, they would be unwise to alienate the
>C64 community and incur a backlash that would be detrimental to their
>exploitation of this (very) niche market.
It would be interesting to see what effect this has on fan sites and other
non-profits (like, say, Secret Weapons, for one thing).
I do plan to add an addendum to the Commodore history in the 12th edition
that features this absolute load of swill. If anyone from Tulip has any
brains at all, they'd be reading this group (so they aren't).
>But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64 hobbyists -
>they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing market with a
>ready source of classic games that require a minimum of computing resources
>and development.
Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.
I don't think they're going to be particularly benevolent to current
commercial C64 software houses, though. Why should they be? I strongly
doubt they're interested in new development, since most of those programs
are Commodore versions of desktop tools, like browsers, operating systems,
et cetera.
--
Cameron Kaiser * cka...@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
Michael J. Schülke
>
> Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.
>
Why?
The only thing they could possibly object to is the ROM files being
included with the emulator. There are quite a few emulators for other
systems that come without the ROMs, and are thriving nonetheless. People
usually find a way to get the ROMs. File sharing services like Kazaa
come to mind.
Besides, everyone who owns a C-64 may legally use that machines ROM
image in an emulator.
Regards,
Michael
wildstar
news:r8UPa.34306$qa5.7...@news2.tin.it:
> Rick, I admit I have no valuable knowledge about US federal law, but,
> anyway, there is some consistence that eludes me in your reasoning.
>
> Now, regarding the Commodore brand in US...Afair the Commodore
> trademark has been used in US for quite a bit by a company called
> Computer Nationals Inc., to sell their PC clones. Their Commodore
> page, which has always been under construction, btw - was located at
> http://www.commodore2000.com , until March of last year, circa,
> disappearing shortly thereafter forever.
>
> I have personally never understood if Computer Nationals Inc. was
> using the Commodore brand name on behalf of Tulip for the US market.
> It's not clear to me if Tulip owns exlcusive worldwide rights to the
> Commodore name, but I tend to assume so. Anyway, the Commodore name
> and logo have been used in US until last year, so it's not exactly a
> 10 years old defunct trademark for the American market.
>
The computer never existed. So it was utterly unused. Tulip may have
challenges from CMD + Click Here Software (Maurice's company). If I
recall right, CBM tried to suit CMD a while back but settled out of
court. Tulip will have no right and the CMD products are copyrighted and
the ownership has been transfered to Maurice and thus they can not
legally stop Maurice or even Jeri. First off, I do not get where they
have 300 "Commercial" websites. I guess it is that .com thinggy but as
far as I understand. There isn't even 50 commercial companies. Most of
the rest is a few hardware boys making a few devices and selling them at
material cost.
I doubt the Commodore2000 will make any legal grounds. I haven't even
seen a picture of this thing so there really is no grounds that they
have. As far as Tulip goes, this can be very interesting.
> The note talks about new games to surface along with these official
> portal. Anyway, I can't see any company investing money into serious
> Commodore 64 development in the XXIII century. I can't help but deny
> the possibility that Electronic Arts will develope FIFA 2004 for the
> C64 after the relaunch.
>
> Speaking of the official software from Tulip, I am personally unsure
> about the platform this alleged definitive emulator will run on. We
> all already gave for granted it has to be the PC, but I think their
> target could be different. Modern cellular phones represent an
> appetible platform, as well as Pocket PC's or, say, the Sony
> Playstation series.
Very possible. Most people here don't want a PC or a very micronized PC
like a handheld with an emulator alone. They want stuff for their
computers. What will we do with a micronized "Web.it" with our beloved
Commodore computers. They shouldn't be messing up the synergy we have. It
would be interesting if there was means of developing handhelds that also
work in conjunction with real Commodore 8-bits. Then there is the C-One
which they may receive a licensce from Jeri sometime in the future and
provide a platform in some strategic partnership. Tulip can help as a
finacial supercell for us. They want strategic partnership with us. This
is want is kind of intriguing.
To be honest, I am investigating this.
wildstar
@news2.tin.it:
Can you imagine a Tulip licensing the C-One and marketing it ?
In a strategic partnership, it might be of interest if they partner with
Jen and Jeri and Tulip put the units together under the Commodore brand
name. This may even lead to financial backing for development of C-One
laptops and PDAs.
wildstar
> No that _isn't_ of any interest to any Commodore fan. Anyone could do
> that now you know: PC and emulator. Geez, you weren't here around the
> time of the "Commodore 2000" incident but the idea of selling PC's
> with an emulator got flamed by people here. In other words no interest
> in that whatsoever.
>
Sorry, my mis-typing here. I told them that it wasn't of any interest.
Sorry for the mistyping here. Forgive me. I did tell them that it was not
of any interest to a Commodore fan.
> Yeah, you're definitely the best person to tell them about the
> Commodore community/scene... oh, wait, no you're not!
Hey, I seen this scene for quite some time. The key things of interests
to a Commodore fan is things that will allow them to play there favorite
Commodore games as well as upgrades to the Commodore 64. BTW: I
personally know more about the Commodore scene than you may realize. I
just don't spend $300 if all I am going to do is the same old thing that
I can spend $25 for. This doesn't mean I wouldn't purchase C= software. I
also see the industry as is and what will be useful in revitalizing any
commercial industry and this is a strange gamble but Tulip will certainly
need our support but they really need to connect to us as a whole. We
don't want a dinky miniturized "Web.it". We want a real Commodore 64 that
will continue on the basic technology as perhaps additional features. We
want to use what we already have. We also want to make full use of the
internet with the exception of the evil popups. I have made note of
things that most of you have stated over time.
PS: I also made a suggestion for them to check out comp.sys.cbm to talk
with many of the people in the Commodore scene as well as other Commodore
mail lists.
White Flame (aka David Holz)
news:MPG.197a55f75...@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
> The only thing they could possibly object to is the ROM files being
> included with the emulator. There are quite a few emulators for other
> systems that come without the ROMs, and are thriving nonetheless. People
> usually find a way to get the ROMs. File sharing services like Kazaa
> come to mind.
Tulip doesn't even own any technology IP, only the brand name, so I doubt
they could do anything against the emulators anyway.
White Flame (aka David Holz)
news:beovik$r2t$1...@titan.btinternet.com...
> It's a chilling prospect based on Dilbert numbers and a large amount
> of commercial cynicism.
I wouldn't call it chilling; I'd just call it stupid.
Sam Gillett
Riccardo Rubini wrote ...
I have been under the impression that Gateway owns more than the patents
behind Commodore hardware. They also own the copyrights to the ROM code(s),
unless I am mistaken. Of course, Tulip might be able to either buy or
license the rights from Gateway.
Somehow, I have the feeling that overall this will do the Commodore
community more harm than good.
Best regards,
Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!
Sam Gillett
Riccardo Rubini wrote ...
>Although I have to say that the alleged 6 million users driven Commodore
>community reminds me a little of Comical Ali's blurbs :-))
I heard that the former Information Minister was looking for a new job.
Maybe Tulip hired him?? ;-)
Riccardo Rubini
> I have been under the impression that Gateway owns more than the
> patents behind Commodore hardware. They also own the copyrights to
> the ROM code(s), unless I am mistaken. Of course, Tulip might be
> able to either buy or license the rights from Gateway.
I think you are right, Sam. Gateway probably owns everything but the name. I
remember I read Gateway owns also some of the Amiga patents as well.
Anyway, I dunno about you, but I would like to point out that my sources are
people speaking in the newsgroups and old articles in the news. How reliable
is gossip ? You might say "It depends about who's speaking". True. But
sometime's not easy to jump at conclusions. For example, if you read old
Ryan Czerwinsky posts regarding the Commodore 65, you might conclude that
50.000 C65 were actually made, and they all were charcoal grey, ready to
ship within relabeled Amiga 600 boxes and currently hanging somewhere in the
US Tropics. Although, http://www.merlancia.us by Rich Woods came few moons
ago, and here you go, you start to question about the credibility of the
former comp.sys.cbm poster - although it really sounded like a funny tale,
that charcoal thing.
Bottom line is : I feel that "we, the people" don't have much clue about
what has really happened to the Commodore patents and trademark, and who
owns this or that today. I sense we all lost ourselves somewhere in between
the many liquidations and bankrupcies that took place in the past years ( if
I don't recall wrong, even Tulip was close or actually faced bankrupcy years
ago ), and all we have are allegations, whose credibility sometimes resides
only in the credibility of the poster.
I, from Italy, have no chances to investigate about Commodore US, but
probably in US it's different, since the citizen have access to a lot of
public documentation that, on the contrary, here is covered and secured on
behalf of privacy laws. For example, it would be difficult for me to
understand what happened to Commodore Italia. Looking in an old phone book,
I understood that in the year after Commodore US demise, they were still in
business as a monitor repair centre, but I do not have access to further
information, not easily, I mean.
> Somehow, I have the feeling that overall this will do the Commodore
> community more harm than good.
We share the same feeling, Sam. No question about it.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> Riccardo, you are a nasty person -- sending Matthew an http URL even
> though you know his PC crashes every time he tries to access the
> web... ;-)
Aw, don't be so hard on me, Michael :-) Put yourself in my shoes : sending
him a copy in A4 format or a brochure via snail mail and waiting for him to
receive it, read it and reply me would definitely slow down the hell outta
the whole thread and kill its vibe, it would be like going from speedballs
to milkshakes, you know.
And, ultimately, I have no insurance his postman wouldn't crash either! :-D
Riccardo
wildstar
> Michael J. Schülke wrote:
> Aw, don't be so hard on me, Michael :-) Put yourself in my shoes :
> sending him a copy in A4 format or a brochure via snail mail and
> waiting for him to receive it, read it and reply me would definitely
> slow down the hell outta the whole thread and kill its vibe, it would
> be like going from speedballs to milkshakes, you know.
>
> And, ultimately, I have no insurance his postman wouldn't crash
> either! :-D
>
> Riccardo
It would be quicker for me to send it to him but I would be too temptive of
sending him a special package. (EG)
Riccardo Rubini
> Riccardo Rubini wrote ...
>
>> Although I have to say that the alleged 6 million users driven
>> Commodore community reminds me a little of Comical Ali's blurbs :-))
>
> I heard that the former Information Minister was looking for a new
> job. Maybe Tulip hired him?? ;-)
Well, this is what I had in mind, although I believe even Mohammed Saeed
al-Sahaf does not cross certain boundaries of sheer fantasy. "6 million of
loyal users" ? Uh?? I mean, is this what Chief Executives use to say when on
food poisoning with psychedelic mushrooms? :-D
Riccardo
wildstar
> Sam Gillett wrote:
> I think you are right, Sam. Gateway probably owns everything but the
> name. I remember I read Gateway owns also some of the Amiga patents as
> well.
>
<<< Snip >>>
> Bottom line is : I feel that "we, the people" don't have much clue
> about what has really happened to the Commodore patents and trademark,
> and who owns this or that today. I sense we all lost ourselves
> somewhere in between the many liquidations and bankrupcies that took
> place in the past years ( if I don't recall wrong, even Tulip was
> close or actually faced bankrupcy years ago ), and all we have are
> allegations, whose credibility sometimes resides only in the
> credibility of the poster.
<<< Snip >>>
>
> We share the same feeling, Sam. No question about it.
>
> Riccardo
I have the same feeling too. I am investigating this as this may take
some rather -um interesting turns. I am awaiting a response and will not
expect an immediate response. I am also giving them a little information
ans simply told them that we want more stuff in relation to products made
for real Commodore 8 bits. This mobile device stuff may be interesting if
it has some means of being usable with real Commodore computers as well
as the C-One. This will also be something for them to think about. It
would be interesting to us to see a PDA sized C-One as well as a Laptop
size C-One. They can have a role here in my humble opinion. Providing a
revitalized commercial market. We really need more info. We need to know
what exactly are they doing.
Michael J. Schülke
>
> Well, this is what I had in mind, although I believe even Mohammed Saeed
> al-Sahaf does not cross certain boundaries of sheer fantasy. "6 million of
> loyal users" ? Uh?? I mean, is this what Chief Executives use to say when on
> food poisoning with psychedelic mushrooms? :-D
>
Oh, that number is easy to come up with. Take the number of all C64s
sold, subtract the number you have personally seen in the trash, and
conclude that all others are still being used by loyal users. ;-)
Michael
Riccardo Rubini
> Oh, that number is easy to come up with. Take the number of all C64s
> sold, subtract the number you have personally seen in the trash, and
> conclude that all others are still being used by loyal users. ;-)
Something I haven't thought before was Tulip actually hiring pendulum
dowsing psychic mediums. All you need to do is feed these new age farts with
a geographic map and, armed with the innate clairvoiance only few human
being have been gifted of, they can determine where are residing all those
C64's, how many there are and, on a more specific level, wether you, the
user, are loyal or not, like if you're cheating on Commodore firing a Speccy
once in a while.
Yep, this sounds more legit :-D
Riccardo
Cameron Kaiser
>Somehow, I have the feeling that overall this will do the Commodore
>community more harm than good.
So do I. Appropriate badges posted in the CWI web site, Secret Weapons and
CKB.
Riccardo Rubini
> Can you imagine a Tulip licensing the C-One and marketing it ?
No, that would be a smart move :-D
Riccardo
Matthew Montchalin
|Riccardo Rubini wrote:
|> Matthew Montchalin wrote:
|>
|> > A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
|> > pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
|> > could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
|> > it.
|>
|> Give a look :
<nonsense snipped>
|Riccardo, you are a nasty person -- sending Matthew an http URL even
|though you know his PC crashes every time he tries to access the web...
|;-)
I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.
wildstar
news:beovng$rat$1...@titan.btinternet.com:
> <<<
> But chances are that Ironstone doesn't give a toss about us C64
> hobbyists - they simply want to capture the emulator/mobile computing
> market with a ready source of classic games that require a minimum of
> computing resources and development.
>>>>
> Which they don't own, I might add. They seem to be working under the
> assumption
> that because they own the Commodore name, they own all the games too,
> like Nintendo.
> Idiots.
>
> Anyway, if they try and sell C64 games commercially I'm going to hit
> them hard
> with a bill for the rights to the music, backed up by commercial
> copyright organisations.
>
> Chris
>
Legally they can not get a single penny as Commodore themselves never
required a license. Most of the third-party software is now public-domain
for quite some time. They were even before 1997. If I recall right, I
believe Escom declared all of the software programs made by Commodore
(that is floppies, cassettes and cartridges) public domain. That is not
reversable. That is the way it is. As for the ROMs such as the
KERNAL/BASIC/CBM DOS, may be defendable if they purchased them. As for
the use of the trademarks, I assumed they are fully acceptable use as
there is only a few "commercial" developers for the Commodore and none of
them used the trademarks other than the words "Commodore 64/128" in the
standard system requirement use and statements that the software or
hardware device is for the Commodore 64 computer. I don't get what they
are exactly trying to do. It is fully acceptable to use the name of the
computer in that form. It has been that way since the 1980s. Where have
they been ????
I think they have to make some clear indication and take some thought.
They haven't made one iota effort to communicate with us in the 6 years
of owning there trademarks. They need to make it clear to us and actually
communicate to us. I think this is there attempt so it may be in our
interest to communicate back to them and help them understand the
Commodore users. So everyone here should start communicating to Tulip. If
I read this correctly, they want us to communicate to them. So let's help
them not screw things up. That's all.
Matthew Montchalin
|Why?
|
|The only thing they could possibly object to is the ROM files being
|included with the emulator. There are quite a few emulators for other
|systems that come without the ROMs, and are thriving nonetheless. People
|usually find a way to get the ROMs. File sharing services like Kazaa
|come to mind.
|
|Besides, everyone who owns a C-64 may legally use that machines ROM
|image in an emulator.
You are apparently confusing trademarks with patents and copyrights.
We were talking about doing business with a particular mark, and
being known by that mark.
Matthew Montchalin
|"Riccardo Rubini" <rru...@tmicha.net> wrote in news:_pVPa.34994$qa5.781639
|@news2.tin.it:
|
|> Matthew Montchalin wrote:
|>
|>> A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
|>> pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
|>> could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
|>> it.
|>
|> Give a look :
|>
|> http://www.amstrad.com/emailer_plus.html
|>
|> Is this what you had in mind, in a Commodore 64 fashion ? :-)
|>
|> Riccardo
|
|Can you imagine a Tulip licensing the C-One and marketing it ?
Can you imagine Jeri as the licensor, Jens as the agent-mediator,
and Tulip as the licensee?
|In a strategic partnership,
Entering into a joint adventure, whether as equals or unequals, is yet
another kind of business relationship that could be entertained.
|it might be of interest if they partner with Jen and Jeri and Tulip
|put the units together under the Commodore brand name. This may even
|lead to financial backing for development of C-One laptops and PDAs.
A rather weak 'trademark' position for Tulip does not necessarily become
any stronger by admitting strangers into their business affairs.
Matthew Montchalin
|"Michael J. Schülke" <news...@mjschuelke.de> wrote in message
|news:MPG.197a55f75...@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
|> The only thing they could possibly object to is the ROM files being
|> included with the emulator. There are quite a few emulators for other
|> systems that come without the ROMs, and are thriving nonetheless. People
|> usually find a way to get the ROMs. File sharing services like Kazaa
|> come to mind.
|
|Tulip doesn't even own any technology IP, only the brand name,
Do you really think that 'names' can be owned without being used?
How about words in a dictionary?
|so I doubt they could do anything against the emulators anyway.
Rather, they might be able to shut down emulators if they contain copies
of the ROM code. But then, those are NOT trademark problems, those
are copyright problems. You CAN tell the difference, can't you?
wildstar
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030712...@lab.oregonvos.net:
> Can you imagine Jeri as the licensor, Jens as the agent-mediator,
> and Tulip as the licensee?
>
>|In a strategic partnership,
>
> Entering into a joint adventure, whether as equals or unequals, is yet
> another kind of business relationship that could be entertained.
>
>|it might be of interest if they partner with Jen and Jeri and Tulip
>|put the units together under the Commodore brand name. This may even
>|lead to financial backing for development of C-One laptops and PDAs.
>
> A rather weak 'trademark' position for Tulip does not necessarily
> become any stronger by admitting strangers into their business
> affairs.
>
Actually it might improve Tulip's position. For one, Tulip would be
marketing a product under the Commodore brand name while at the same time
getting better support from us by marketing a real computer designed
around Commodore. I would actually be interested if they did that. It
would be smart and they will have a platform in their arsenal to market
and build relations with real Commodore users. At the same time, they can
be beneficial in the process of micronizing the C-One into portables and
micro-portables like mini-laptops to as small as PDAs and possibly
digital PDA/Phone hybrids. As well as other markets which will expand the
platform, technology and brand name. This can be good if done in the
right manner. There would even be an OS in their arsenal that they can
license under strategic partnerships which has mutual benfits.
As of yet, there really hasn't been a commercial use of the brand name in
the US in the manner that would inhibit Tulip. Right now, it is simply up
to Tulip to market now to the US with the Commodore trademark in order to
reinforce and strengthen their trademark position. It will be of their
interest to make connection to the actual users which they claim to want
in support.
wildstar
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030712...@lab.oregonvos.net:
>
> I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.
>
I pity the fool who can't use a graphical web browser with keyboard
actions. Ever used the TAB key or the DOS based Graphical WebBrowser named
Arachnoid (something like that).
wildstar
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030712...@lab.oregonvos.net:
> Do you really think that 'names' can be owned without being used?
>
> How about words in a dictionary?
>
Tradenames such as software title name.
> Rather, they might be able to shut down emulators if they contain
> copies of the ROM code. But then, those are NOT trademark problems,
> those are copyright problems. You CAN tell the difference, can't you?
>
They may possessed more than just the trademarks. Hey they had 6 years to
do so with Gateway. Beside Gateway, doesn't tend to post this kind of
info anyway. This is corporate stuff that is up to the company to decide
whether to post it or not. Certain copyrights and patents may have been
purchased at low prices. When it comes to copyrights, then it may be
limited to only software made by Commodore not for the Commodore
platform. Rule of jurisdiction. They have NO jurisdiction pertaining to
software titles not made by Commodore. Of course ROM binaries are
considered under software and is copyrighted not patented. This is still
highly unclear.
J. Robertson
wrote:
>Sorry, my mis-typing here. I told them that it wasn't of any interest.
>Sorry for the mistyping here. Forgive me. I did tell them that it was not
>of any interest to a Commodore fan.
Fine fine...
> We want a real Commodore 64 that
>will continue on the basic technology as perhaps additional features.
This probably ever isn't likely.
> We
>want to use what we already have. We also want to make full use of the
>internet with the exception of the evil popups. I have made note of
>things that most of you have stated over time.
So evil popups are your _only_ main concern? :-)
>PS: I also made a suggestion for them to check out comp.sys.cbm to talk
>with many of the people in the Commodore scene as well as other Commodore
>mail lists.
This won't happen either. Tulip will never show up here.
Jason
--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jk...@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
J. Robertson
wrote:
Hi, Cameron,
>It would be interesting to see what effect this has on fan sites and other
>non-profits (like, say, Secret Weapons, for one thing).
Very true. Though, I must say, I'm still wondering what they defined
as "300 comercial" sites? I didn't think there were _that_ many
commercial sites.
>I do plan to add an addendum to the Commodore history in the 12th edition
>that features this absolute load of swill. If anyone from Tulip has any
>brains at all, they'd be reading this group (so they aren't).
Keep the word processor open on that addendum as I have a feeling soon
things will get even more interesting.
As for Tulip here in csc, I doubt they'd ever show their face.
>Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.
Ugh...
>I don't think they're going to be particularly benevolent to current
>commercial C64 software houses, though. Why should they be? I strongly
>doubt they're interested in new development, since most of those programs
>are Commodore versions of desktop tools, like browsers, operating systems,
>et cetera.
Yep.
wildstar
> Fine fine...
>
> This probably ever isn't likely.
Possibly if they license the C-One technology. :-D
> So evil popups are your _only_ main concern? :-)
>
At this time when we get into full graphical web browsing. As far as a
computer virus, well we should stay clear of them, too. :-)
>>PS: I also made a suggestion for them to check out comp.sys.cbm to
>>talk with many of the people in the Commodore scene as well as other
>>Commodore mail lists.
>
> This won't happen either. Tulip will never show up here.
It was worth the effort. Maybe if they are serious at any level, they
would do so. At least it give them a fairly free way of getting in
contact with us "Commodore users". It is only senseful for them to do so.
Matthew Montchalin
|Matthew Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote in
|news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030712...@lab.oregonvos.net:
|
|
|> Can you imagine Jeri as the licensor, Jens as the agent-mediator,
|> and Tulip as the licensee?
|>
|>|In a strategic partnership,
|>
|> Entering into a joint adventure, whether as equals or unequals, is yet
|> another kind of business relationship that could be entertained.
|>
|>|it might be of interest if they partner with Jen and Jeri and Tulip
|>|put the units together under the Commodore brand name. This may even
|>|lead to financial backing for development of C-One laptops and PDAs.
|>
|> A rather weak 'trademark' position for Tulip does not necessarily
|> become any stronger by admitting strangers into their business
|> affairs.
|
|Actually it might improve Tulip's position.
It is debatable whether they can make more money by arranging for
a business partner to share in the use of a particular mark,
and if they DID do that, that sort of thing serves to diminish
their exclusive control over the mark. Their grip over the mark
weakens. One of the most important things about trademarks is
exclusivity, and dealing with the mark from a position of control.
|For one, Tulip would be marketing a product under the Commodore
|brand name while at the same time getting better support from us by
|marketing a real computer designed around Commodore. I would actually
|be interested if they did that. It would be smart and they will have
|a platform in their arsenal to market and build relations with real
|Commodore users. At the same time, they can be beneficial in the
|process of micronizing the C-One into portables and micro-portables
|like mini-laptops to as small as PDAs and possibly digital PDA/Phone
|hybrids. As well as other markets which will expand the platform,
|technology and brand name. This can be good if done in the right manner.
|There would even be an OS in their arsenal that they can license
|under strategic partnerships which has mutual benfits.
Really. And what OS might that be? The DOS that Per slapped together,
for accessing the IDE drive?
Matthew Montchalin
What for?
Matthew Montchalin
|news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030712...@lab.oregonvos.net:
|
|
|> Do you really think that 'names' can be owned without being used?
|>
|> How about words in a dictionary?
|>
|
|Tradenames such as software title name.
Tradenames cannot be owned without being used.
wildstar
> It is debatable whether they can make more money by arranging for
> a business partner to share in the use of a particular mark,
> and if they DID do that, that sort of thing serves to diminish
> their exclusive control over the mark. Their grip over the mark
> weakens. One of the most important things about trademarks is
> exclusivity, and dealing with the mark from a position of control.
>
No, they themselves exclusively use the trademark but they license the
C-One technology to produce and package together in the Commodore
trademark. A partnership on the equipment manufacturing level (OEM
partnership is an option) and then they bundle a system package together
under the Commodore trademark.
> Really. And what OS might that be? The DOS that Per slapped together,
> for accessing the IDE drive?
NO, Pers didn't build an "OS" or a "DOS". He only built a boot menu
loader system. Which would be used to configure the FPGAs onboard. This
is what you misunderstand. Actually, what I was talking about is things
like =WiNGS=, Wheels SC/GEOS, and possibly some other OSs they would
appear in the future. That is the basis of the statement. This may
include my OS project in the future. As for BASIC, it may imply you too.
So BASIC 2.2 may be a part of a partnership that you can make with Tulip
and Tulip can pay you $2 x 1,000-100,000 copies. This would be $2,000-
$200,000 for you. This means they can by a license to manufacture and pay
you $2 per copy sold or distributed.
wildstar
So you can be able to read what we are talking about and not be so
freakin' ignorant.
Wake up and update your browser. IE is not your only choice and about all
browsers for Intel and compatible PCs are free these days simply because
noone is going to pay even $5.00 for a webbrowser when you can download one
or a decent one is already bundled.
wildstar
In the US. This is something that we have yet anyone taking over the use.
If Tulip was to start production then they would possibly ascertain the
trademarks and secure themselves here in the United States.
They did win that Dell case. In a settlement, they will receive $40+
million dollars on a patent issue just recently.
Riccardo Rubini
> Right 100%. Death of Power64, CCS64, VICE, Frodo and C64S; film at 11.
I have to disagree, Cameron. Projects like Basilisk II or vMac are still
alive and kicking, even if you don't get the emulated computers' firmware
with the official releases. Some of us are smart enough to own an universal
programmer and be able to read the ROMs, and others are smart enough to
accomplish the same purpose of having a working firmware in some other way
;-)
Riccardo
Matthew Montchalin
|> a business partner to share in the use of a particular mark,
|> and if they DID do that, that sort of thing serves to diminish
|> their exclusive control over the mark. Their grip over the mark
|> weakens. One of the most important things about trademarks is
|> exclusivity, and dealing with the mark from a position of control.
|
|No, they themselves exclusively use the trademark but they license
As licensees or licensors?
|the C-One technology to produce and package together in the Commodore
|trademark. A partnership on the equipment manufacturing level (OEM
|partnership is an option) and then they bundle a system package together
|under the Commodore trademark.
There are so many ambiguities here, that I am going to have to ask
you to rephrase your question.
Matthew Montchalin
|Matthew Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote in
|news:Pine.LNX.4.44.03071...@lab.oregonvos.net:
|
|> On Sun, 13 Jul 2003, wildstar wrote:
|>|Matthew Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote in
|>|news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030712...@lab.oregonvos.net:
|>|> I pity the fool that has to plug a mouse into his computer.
|>|
|>|I pity the fool who can't use a graphical web browser with keyboard
|>|actions. Ever used the TAB key or the DOS based Graphical WebBrowser
|>|named Arachnoid (something like that).
|>
|> What for?
|
|So you can be able to read what we are talking about and not be so
|freakin' ignorant.
Screw 'em if they think that a website is always there, and has info
that is self-authenticating.
Matthew Montchalin
|> Tradenames cannot be owned without being used.
|>
|>
|
|In the US.
This is our mutual vantage point, is it not?
|This is something that we have yet anyone taking over the use.
Well, Tulip ought to have ways of proving 'activity' and 'exclusivity,'
if the mark is really being used to their benefit, with others
excluded from it, and the activity is so great as to justify de facto
recognition by the public, not just de jure recognition by various
government agents here and there (such as US Customs, for instance).
|If Tulip was to start production then they would possibly ascertain the
|trademarks and secure themselves here in the United States.
If the mark is being used all over the place, there is the issue of
exclusivity.
|They did win that Dell case.
Citation?
|In a settlement, they will receive $40+ million dollars on a patent
|issue just recently.
We were talking about trademarks, not patents! Keep your questions
of law straight, will you?! Geeeeeze!
Anders Carlsson
> Commodore themselves never required a license.
Furthermore, in the early days Commodore released their own
clones of popular arcades without getting proper licensing
(see VIC-20 cartridges like Jelly Monsters). Of course these
titles were removed from the market soon after release.
--
Anders Carlsson
Larry Anderson
"Commodore" and "Commodore 64" to describe your stuff.
"J. Robertson" wrote:
>
> Saw this mentioned on amiga.org then went to investigate it for
> myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link:
> Today Tulip Computers NV (Tulip) and Ironstone Partners Ltd.
> (Ironstone) signed a licence agreement for a partnership, which is a
> major step in the global re-launch of the Commodore brand name.
The key word here is: "The Commodore Brand Name"
> Tulip will receive a license fee for all Commodore C64 products
> delivered by Ironstone, installed on all computer brands using the
> Microsoft or any other operating system and all Commodore 64 branded
> products.
The Key word here is "Commodore 64 Branded products"
> In addition, Tulip will receive a license fee over the
> revenue from software downloads, subscriptions and advertising.
So the agreement with ironstone is to collect money every time someone
downloads an individual file and/or receives material with the brand names.
> Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million loyal
> Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world. This community is
> currently spread over hundreds of unofficial websites. The community
> craves acknowledgement and authenticity from the true Commodore C64
> brand.
We crave authenticity and knowledge from Commodore, not the brand name.
> Tulip is the owner of the brand name Commodore. Through this
> partnership Tulip grants to Ironstone the exclusive rights to exploit
> the official Commodore C64 web-portal and use of the Commodore 64
> brand name.
I like the term "Exploit" there, very appropriate.
> Ironstone and Tulip invite the Commodore community to join the
> official Commodore C64 web-portal.
I.E. "Join us or we'll sue you for trademark brand infringement."
> Currently there are about 300
> commercial websites that use the name Commodore or Commodore 64
> without having a license from Tulip. Tulip will not allow unauthorised
> use of the Commodore brand.
If they aren't 'commercial' it get harder to sue for trademark infringement.
> In this partnership, Ironstone will create the official Commodore C64
> games and community portal designed to focus and harness the power of
> the Commodore C64 user base
Glossary:
Money = Power
> and to efficiently provide the services
> required by these individuals for a fee.
Specifically, use of the "Commodore" and "Commodore 64" brand name.
> The founders of Ironstone are experienced and successful, in previous similar projects Ironstone
> achieved a subscriber to pay subscriber conversion rate that was
> unparalleled in the Internet space.
Searched for Ironstone via Yahoo, they must have been suing others
previously under a different name.
> The main objective of the Ironstone official C64 portal is to unite
> this massive global fan base of passionate enthusiasts.
...who are willing to pay for the "Commodore" and "Commodore 64" brand name
> Through its
> web portal, Ironstone will market the official C64 emulator
I wonder what the "Official C64" emulator is that they plan to use.
> in various
> software and hardware formats. The games offered by the Ironstone
> web-portal will include the famous classic C64 games as well as
> exciting new games and will also sell its Commodore-branded products
> through the site.
>
> Tulip will get full access to the estimated 6 million users and will
> also sell its Commodore branded products through this portal.
Read: Tulip gets everyone's e-mail addresses for targeted marketing.
> Tulip
> will introduce, the upcoming months, new hardware products under the
> Commodore brand name, being able to use the C64 emulator.
More PC clones with the C= logo, oh boy! :-P
> According to Bjorn Bruggeman, Brand Manager Commodore: Through
> strategic partnerships we're creating a web of Commodore partner
> companies. Each partner, or licensee, is selected on his unique
> expertise and will focus on a specific market segment within the
> Commodore strategy.
Step right up fore exclusive 'Commodore Brand" rights for your
technologies, have checkbook ready.
> The synergy advantages are huge.
Glossary:
Synnergy = Profit Potential
> The license
> agreement with Ironstone is an important step in this process and will
> enable Tulip to enter a complete new era with almost unlimited
> e-commerce opportunities.
Glossary:
Unlimited E-Commerce Opportunities = Uncounted/untested revenue sources.
> Darren Melbourne, Creative Director, Ironstone Partners commented, “
> The license deal with Tulip is a huge breakthrough for the millions of
> C64 enthusiasts and retro gamers around the world who are still loyal
> to this incredible games system. Ironstone is committed to bringing
> this technology and games library back to prominence on every platform
> available to us.
1. Get Trademark Rights
2. Sue for $$$
3. ???
4. Prominence!
[snip!]
>
> About Ironstone Partners
>
{snip!]
>
Looking at their site:
http://www.ironstonepartners.com/
One of their companies deals with mobile handheld and phone games....
The other a Console Games developer with three dozen games in their history...
--
01000011 01001111 01001101 01001101 01001111 01000100 01001111 01010010 01000101
Larry Anderson - Sysop of Silicon Realms BBS (209) 754-1363
300-14.4k bps
Set your 8-bit C= rigs to sail for http://www.portcommodore.com/
01000011 01001111 01001101 01010000 01010101 01010100 01000101 01010010 01010011
Steppe
> Saw this mentioned on amiga.org then went to investigate it for
> myself. Found this on Tulip's on site (www.tulip.com more direct link:
The article has vanished into nothingness, it's not accessible anymore.
Could it be that this was some kind of april fool joke, made by some very
nasty website hackers? Remember, there was some combined effort to hack
websites of all kinds some days ago, you could even win a price.
Comments?
/Steppe
Anders Carlsson
>> http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corp_article.asp?nid=109, also
> The article has vanished into nothingness, it's not accessible
> anymore.
I'm trying to access http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corpnews.asp
but get "server too busy" from their IIS:
"The request cannot be processed at this time. The amount
of traffic exceeds the Web site's configured capacity."
Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?
I doubt that hackers looking to destroy 6000 web servers would
bother inserting quite on-topic stuff on the sites. Either Tulip
went down by load, or got so many responses from Commodore users
that they brought the page down and will reconsider what to do.
--
Anders Carlsson
wildstar
> As licensees or licensors?
Licensor is the person or organization issuing the license. In the
subject manner, Jeri would be the licensor of the C-One technology.
Licensee is the receiver of the license. Like Employer and employee.
Tulip would be the licensee of the C-One technology. As for the Commodore
trademark, Tulip would be the licensor and people like us who may want to
use the Commodore trademark would be the licensee.
> There are so many ambiguities here, that I am going to have to ask
> you to rephrase your question.
>
>
Really this is not a question but a statement. I'll help rephrase for you
to understand. Scenario Theory: Tulip gets a license from Jeri to produce
C-One and then Tulip assembles a C-One package (fully assembled computer)
using the Commodore brand name that Tulip owns. This scenario may
strengthen Tulip's Commodore trademark position. While paying Jeri
royalties on the C-One technology. This is where Jeri will be licensing
technology and Tulip using that technology and market it under a brand
name that Tulip owns. This means Tulip would be a licensee of the C-One
technology and leverage a niche market with that technology under the
Commodore brand name.
Re-read the scenario theory if you have to. I am sure that you should
catch on to what I mean. If you need, read the first response paragraph
that I made.
Tulip can also license the Commodore trademark. This would make them a
licensee and licensor.
Cameron Kaiser
I agree with you in principle, but I'm going to go out on a limb here: if
Tulip is really serious about this, they'll crack down on other emulator
development whether or not there's any legal basis for them to do so. All
they have to do is bottle it up in court for awhile, which they can afford
to do, and basically drive development into the ground. They've already
stated they want to make an "official emulator" and they definitely can't
do that with benchmark emulators like VICE being in the majority.
As a judge once remarked in a legal case I had some involvement in (not as
one of the parties, thank goodness), "It's not a matter of right or wrong,
but who can stick it out longer."
That is, if Tulip really is serious about this, and isn't just huffing in
the wind.
--
Cameron Kaiser * cka...@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ **
Anders Carlsson
> That is, if Tulip really is serious about this, and isn't just
> huffing in the wind.
I still believe we should try not to become downright hostile towards
Tulip before we know exactly what they're up to. If they are serious
about maintaining the six million people userbase, they would probably
think twice before screwing the potential customers royally. At least
as long as they are investing money in the Commodore business.
--
Anders Carlsson
Sam Gillett
Matthew Montchalin wrote ...
Is Usenet self-authenticating? Do you use Usenet?
Don't bother answering. I already know.
Are your arguments against the internet futile?
Don't bother answering that either.
Riccardo Rubini
> I agree with you in principle, but I'm going to go out on a limb
> here: if Tulip is really serious about this, they'll crack down on
> other emulator development whether or not there's any legal basis for
> them to do so.
Well, you mean Tulip going directly to the source, rather than preserving
only the ROMs copyright, and shutting it off ? It could be. It depends
mainly where the lawsuit takes place for them to succeed or having it
accepted by the judge.
For starters their aim could be only to scare non-official emulators
developers off via their lawyers and maybe prosecute those who don't obey to
their restrictions.
It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and actually
buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source and asking everybody
and everywhere to remove any previous release. This has happened already to
some other piece of software, formerly public domain or freeware and
thereafter sold as a commercial product.
> All they have to do is bottle it up in court for
> awhile, which they can afford to do, and basically drive development
> into the ground.
Yes, probably they can afford it. But I am unsure they'll run a reprisal of
any sort, combing a web page after another. Besides, how much money would
cost to them bringing to court all the people involved in eventual
"unofficial" activity ? If you run a business, you don't have to spend more
than you get and it is still way uncertain how big their revenues will be
coming from this project.
> They've already stated they want to make an
> "official emulator" and they definitely can't do that with benchmark
> emulators like VICE being in the majority.
Making an official emulator could also mean making an emulator official :
choosing from the products already available, buying the rights to it and
resell it :-)
> As a judge once remarked in a legal case I had some involvement in
> (not as one of the parties, thank goodness), "It's not a matter of
> right or wrong, but who can stick it out longer."
Sad but true...
> That is, if Tulip really is serious about this, and isn't just
> huffing in the wind.
Only time will tell how serious Tulip is. It's too early and easy to jump at
the wrong conclusions.
Riccardo
Joseph Fenn
condition if I could change its name to mine and not get sued by Ford!!1
In fact I wonder if copyright laws have a time limit to still be
legally effective after the original producer has been dead for 50
years or so?? This whole discussion about CBM and the legalities
of its copyrighted stuff software etc sounds ridiculous to me!!
Joe (aka kilroy)
****************************************************
* Ham KH6JF AARS/MARS ABM6JF QCWA WW2 VET WD RADIO *
****************************************************
Riccardo Rubini
> Really this is not a question but a statement. I'll help rephrase for
> you to understand. Scenario Theory: Tulip gets a license from Jeri to
> produce C-One and then Tulip assembles a C-One package (fully
> assembled computer) using the Commodore brand name that Tulip owns.
Now, Rick, straight from your heart : do you seriously believe Tulip's
executive is aware of the C-One ?
I bet a Jack Tramiel's autographed pint of Chuck Peddle's sweat Tulip knows
absolutely NOTHING about the existence of the C-One. And thank God for that,
they might actually consider about suing poor Jeri or Jens for that
devilish, unofficial product or force them to resell it with anything but
the original Pong firmware! :-)
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> I doubt that hackers looking to destroy 6000 web servers would
> bother inserting quite on-topic stuff on the sites. Either Tulip
> went down by load, or got so many responses from Commodore users
> that they brought the page down and will reconsider what to do.
Nah...If you look at any other asp based off of their homepage you get the
same results and 501 errors ( "Server too Busy" )... The ASP engine of IIS
is hanging. It's a well known flaw of the IIS + ASP couple, old as coal -
and a good reason to drop IIS and ASP altogether and use something more
reliable. You can experience this on servers running IIS from 3.0 to latest
.NET releases.
Sometimes it is just a RequestQueueMax set too low in registry, other times
an SQL related problem or a script causing the ASP Stack to crash... It is
usually the symptom of a misconfiguration on their servers, and sometimes it
happens with no apparent reason, it is not necessarily related to the
Commodore relaunch article we've all been reading.
Riccardo
Matthew Montchalin
|I wonder if I had a model T ford in the garage still in working
|condition if I could change its name to mine and not get sued
|by Ford!!1
Aren't you confusing trademarks with copyrights? Surely you know
how to distinguish between them, don't you?
wildstar
news:UcmQa.26318$it4.6...@news1.tin.it:
> Now, Rick, straight from your heart : do you seriously believe Tulip's
> executive is aware of the C-One ?
>
> I bet a Jack Tramiel's autographed pint of Chuck Peddle's sweat Tulip
> knows absolutely NOTHING about the existence of the C-One. And thank
> God for that, they might actually consider about suing poor Jeri or
> Jens for that devilish, unofficial product or force them to resell it
> with anything but the original Pong firmware! :-)
>
> Riccardo
>
Simple... look it up in google search and vola, they can find out. The
point is get it to there attention.
I am sure it isn't that hard and that big of a secret.
I could say that they really don't know at this time.
They probably will not as they will never win and loose too much money.
Also there is no patents and Tulip really doesn't have the money to waste
on really stupid actions. They will likely take a more friendlier
approach as smart bean counters would not be soooo stupid that they will
carry out actions that will loose support. Right now, they should realize
that they are on rocky starts and will want to take smarter moves.
wildstar
news:k2gllv2...@legolas.mdh.se:
> I'm trying to access http://www.tulip.com/aboutus/corpnews.asp
> but get "server too busy" from their IIS:
>
> "The request cannot be processed at this time. The amount
> of traffic exceeds the Web site's configured capacity."
>
> Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?
>
> I doubt that hackers looking to destroy 6000 web servers would
> bother inserting quite on-topic stuff on the sites. Either Tulip
> went down by load, or got so many responses from Commodore users
> that they brought the page down and will reconsider what to do.
>
A little thought, eh ? Calling to the International Network of Commodore
users (INC users), we shall email them and visit their sites to get their
attention. :-)
Eh? I think this will get there attention. Guess it is all part of a
process to get Tulip to listen. I love to see what they will say on there
website when it gets back up. I think they just got our attention and we
certainly got theirs.
Matthew Montchalin
<digression snip>
|> There are so many ambiguities here, that I am going to have to ask
|> you to rephrase your question.
|
|Really this is not a question but a statement.
Most of your stuff is delivered so unartfully, it comes across as
a question.
|I'll help rephrase for you to understand. Scenario Theory: Tulip gets
|a license from Jeri to produce C-One and then Tulip assembles a C-One
|package (fully assembled computer) using the Commodore brand name that
|Tulip owns.
What you meant to say was:
Jeri grants Tulip a license to produce C-1 machines, for a particular
geographic market, and subject to various other conditions, for a certain
period of time (that is, with a sunset provision), for a certain amount
of money (and for a certain number of electronic components, and hours
of labor for assembly), &c.
J. Robertson
<anders....@mds.mdh.se> wrote:
>Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?
Actually I think that happened. Once people stated the site couldn't
be reached I went to the Slashdot site and lo and behold someone
posted the Tulip news there hence the /. effect strikes again.
Jason
--
E-mail #1: jkr[at]westol.com
E-mail #2: jk...@juno.com
(Use E-mail #1 for a quicker response.)
Web site : http://www.westol.com/~jkr/
--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
news:k2gllv2...@legolas.mdh.se...
> Did anyone /. Tulip's website, or what?
http://slashdot.org/articles/03/07/13/043234.shtml?tid=162&tid=99
--
White Flame (aka David Holz)
http://www.white-flame.com/
(spamblock in effect)
wildstar
news:Pine.LNX.4.44.030713...@lab.oregonvos.net:
> Most of your stuff is delivered so unartfully, it comes across as
> a question.
Um, excuse me. Do you know how questions are structured. For one you
need to use WHO,WHAT,WHY,HOW,WHERE or anything like that. My post did
not remotely resemble a question.
> What you meant to say was:
>
> Jeri grants Tulip a license to produce C-1 machines, for a
> particular
> geographic market, and subject to various other conditions, for a
> certain period of time (that is, with a sunset provision), for a
> certain amount of money (and for a certain number of electronic
> components, and hours of labor for assembly), &c.
>
>
I said the scenario theory would be that Tulip would acquire a license
to sell/manufacture devices using the C-One technology. I stated nothing
about geographical are or location. The details of how the terms would
be made by Jeri/Jens. By having a licensed right to market the C-One.
They would have a product that would be of interest to Commodore users.
Tulip would package the product under the "Commodore" brand name. Any
sales of any product to US citizens with the Commodore trademark would
strengthen Tulip's "Commodore" trademarks position in the US. If the
products are based on C-One technology, that would improve customer
interest. These customers they are expecting are Commodore users as
stated. This means us. So they better well make products that would be
of reasonable use to Commodore users.
I stated the basics of the theory. The following sentence is a question.
Do you follow what I am saying ?
The reason I use the word "would" because it is improper to say Tulip
will. Tulip has made no decision that I can confirm they will do. So I
am stating it properly. BTW: I would assume Tulip would want global wide
license and constringency terms can be made about certain regional
areas.
wildstar
news:8t64hvcf92n3gdpls...@4ax.com:
> Actually I think that happened. Once people stated the site couldn't
> be reached I went to the Slashdot site and lo and behold someone
> posted the Tulip news there hence the /. effect strikes again.
>
Behold they did. I think it is a combination of efforts. Slashdot and
Commodore users. Boy did they get attention.
Anders Carlsson
> It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and
> actually buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source
> and asking everybody and everywhere to remove any previous release.
Since Irongate seems focused on mobile and handheld gaming, it might
turn out that they buy/steal a license of VICE and port it to their
handheld units, while leaving PC versions alone. Isn't there already
some C64 emulator for mobile units by the way?
--
Anders Carlsson
Peter Karlsson
> Isn't there already some C64 emulator for mobile units by the way?
At least Frodo is ported to several EPOC/SymbianOS devices (such as recent
Nokia and Sony Ericsson phones, and the older Psion handhelds).
--
\\//
Peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/
I do not read or respond to mail with HTML attachments.
Michael J. Schülke
> It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and actually
> buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source and asking everybody
> and everywhere to remove any previous release.
That's not possible. VICE has been released under the GNU GPL so far,
and that license cannot be rectracted. VICE, at least up to the current
version, will always remain GPLed free software.
Even making future versions of VICE closed source would be difficult.
Derivative works of software received under the GPL must be GPLed as
well. The only way to do it would be for *each contributor* to VICE,
past and present, to give another, non-GPL, license to Tulip. And of
course, even then others could continue to develop open source VICE.
> This has happened already to
> some other piece of software, formerly public domain or freeware and
> thereafter sold as a commercial product.
Choose your words with care. Anything put into the public domain cannot
be taken away. Of course, anyone is free to take something from the
public domain, modify it, and sell the modified (or even unmodified)
version under any license they like. But they cannot stop others from
using and distributing the public domain content.
"Freeware", OTOH, is a rather undefined term. What can and what cannot
be done depends on the actual license under which the product was
distributed.
Regards,
Michael
Michael J. Schülke
> Now, Rick, straight from your heart : do you seriously believe Tulip's
> executive is aware of the C-One ?
>
> I bet a Jack Tramiel's autographed pint of Chuck Peddle's sweat Tulip knows
> absolutely NOTHING about the existence of the C-One. And thank God for that,
> they might actually consider about suing poor Jeri or Jens for that
> devilish, unofficial product or force them to resell it with anything but
> the original Pong firmware! :-)
You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:
| That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:
|
| - talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication was
| "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.
and, in another mail:
| I'm eagerly awaiting their [Ironstone Partners'] answer to the eMail
| I've sent them yesterday.
Now, please send me that pint... ;-)
Regards,
Michael
Riccardo Rubini
>> I bet a Jack Tramiel's autographed pint of Chuck Peddle's sweat
>> Tulip knows absolutely NOTHING about the existence of the C-One. And
>> thank God for that, they might actually consider about suing poor
>> Jeri or Jens for that devilish, unofficial product or force them to
>> resell it with anything but the original Pong firmware! :-)
>
> You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:
aha. There was a slight suspect growing in me somebody really dared to let
Tulip know, although I thought the attempt was Rick's or Matthew's...That's
why I didn't bet a beer :-)
>> That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:
>>
>> - talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication
>> was "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.
I thought talks weren't needed to understand they could have not sold the
computer as the "Commodore One", since nor Jens nor Jeri own the brand name.
You don't need to ask Tulip to understand it. But they even talked to
Tulip. Although the fact the project was immediately canned doesn't surprise
me at all.
>> I'm eagerly awaiting their [Ironstone Partners'] answer to the eMail
>> I've sent them yesterday.
Ironstone will take care of the new official portal, I believe, they seem
focused only on the software side. When PC manufacturing comes, Tulip has to
be involved, and they already canned the project. It's true that pushing the
C-One _through_ Ironstone could have slightly different results, but I
wouldn't hold my breath.
> Now, please send me that pint... ;-)
If you're so eager to receive a pint of sweat, I think I'll make your day
adding a can of Leo Tramiel's dandruff :-)
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> Riccardo Rubini wrote:
>
>> It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and
>> actually buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source and
>> asking everybody and everywhere to remove any previous release.
>
> That's not possible. VICE has been released under the GNU GPL so far,
> and that license cannot be rectracted.
You are wrong, Michael. All Tulip needs is the consent from all those
involved in the project to switch the license from GNU GPL to something
else. Probably someone could refuse to do so, and his contributions shall be
removed - and so rewritten from scratch. No big deal, however.
Just give a look at the threads that took place in 1998 on fa.linux.kernel
when IBM moved its baby step into the Linux world and licensing.
> VICE, at least up to the
> current version, will always remain GPLed free software.
This is true. But you can also obtain a written consent from the current
developers not to update the project. How ? What about hiring the VICE team
?
Without the input of its developers, VICE would fall apart, like an engine
without gas. This is the Commodore community and both you and me know we are
definitely not six millions...If nobody has already contributed to the VICE
code it's because it has no interest in doing so or lacks the skills.
> Even making future versions of VICE closed source would be difficult.
> Derivative works of software received under the GPL must be GPLed as
> well. The only way to do it would be for *each contributor* to VICE,
> past and present, to give another, non-GPL, license to Tulip. And of
> course, even then others could continue to develop open source VICE.
Aha, you know it then! See...It is possible, but difficult :-) Still
possible...
We're talking hypothesis though, aren't we ?
> Choose your words with care.
LOL, I usually tend to do so :-P
> Anything put into the public domain cannot
> be taken away.
Are you sure ? I can cite a couple of occasions where the last public domain
release, of a subsequent commercial software, mysteriously fallen off the
face of Earth.
Legally speaking it is not possible and should not happen. But most of ISP's
just piss in their pants when a Software company gives them a call from
their lawyers, asking to remove this or that from John Doe's website
content - and pull the plug.
> Of course, anyone is free to take something from the
> public domain, modify it, and sell the modified (or even unmodified)
> version under any license they like. But they cannot stop others from
> using and distributing the public domain content.
Read above.
> "Freeware", OTOH, is a rather undefined term. What can and what cannot
> be done depends on the actual license under which the product was
> distributed.
Freeware usually means you don't have to pay for using it :-)
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
> Since Irongate seems focused on mobile and handheld gaming, it might
> turn out that they buy/steal a license of VICE and port it to their
> handheld units, while leaving PC versions alone. Isn't there already
> some C64 emulator for mobile units by the way?
Aw, commercially speaking there is Pocket C64 (
http://www.clickgamer.com/moreinfo.htm?pid=4§ion=PPC ) , it runs on the
PocketPC and costs something like 7$. Seems nice.
Speaking of non commercial products, there is a C64 emulator for the Nokia
7650, the project is currently on SourceForge and possibly ported to other
cellular phones of the Nokia family as well. There is also PAL64, for the
PalmOS ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pal64/ ), which seems to be still in
development.
Riccardo
Riccardo Rubini
Tulip could try every trick in the book, and benefit from help of others,
although I definitely doubt their counters will ever reach the 6th million
visitor <g>
Riccardo
Matthew Montchalin
|Riccardo Rubini wrote:
|
|> It could also be that Tulip makes an offer to the VICE team and actually
|> buys the exclusive of the product, closing the source and asking everybody
|> and everywhere to remove any previous release.
|
|That's not possible. VICE has been released under the GNU GPL so far,
|and that license cannot be rectracted.
Unlike leases, licenses are generally, on the part of the licensor,
revocable at will.
Matthew Montchalin
|You just lost. Jens wrote on the C-One mailing list yesterday:
|
|| That's right - the name has been changed to C-One for two reasons:
||
|| - talks with Tulip ended before they really started. Communication was
|| "ineffective", that's all I want to say about it.
When is the name of the mailing list going to be changed?
Anders Carlsson
> commercially speaking there is Pocket C64, costs something like 7$.
So that is one of the obvious targets for Tulip/Irongate to shut down.
--
Anders Carlsson
Riccardo Rubini
Maybe they will simply buy the rights and proceed with their own
development. If I were in their shoes, that's what I would do. It costs less
than developing the emulator from scratch.
Riccardo
Pheuque
Realistically, if some one with some resources took on the project, it there
any reason why a single chip Commodore 64 could not be made today?
Even with something like the IDE64 could be put on chip so that all that was
needed to add storage was a compact flash adapter. Or what the hell,
seperate logic for an IDE adapter that could fake a 1541 style drive could
be reworked and put on a new Commodore chip.
One of those small joy-balls like found on many cell phones today, and a
Blackbery style keyboard... I bet you would have a resonably low cost,
powerful PDA. Since there is no need to track a cursor on a screen, and the
screen is a simple 16 color one, it could be very cheap to make as well.
Imagine a the under $50 PDA that could use all the old commodore software.
"wildstar" <wilds...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93B680632B766wi...@216.168.3.44...
> "Riccardo Rubini" <rru...@tmicha.net> wrote in
news:_pVPa.34994$qa5.781639
> @news2.tin.it:
>
> > Matthew Montchalin wrote:
> >
> >> A cute little answering machine with a LCD display capable of 320x200
> >> pixels x 16 colors (and then some) would be quite collectable if you
> >> could plug a microcassette in, and play some simple cassette games on
> >> it.
> >
> > Give a look :
> >
> > http://www.amstrad.com/emailer_plus.html
> >
> > Is this what you had in mind, in a Commodore 64 fashion ? :-)
> >
> > Riccardo
>
> Can you imagine a Tulip licensing the C-One and marketing it ?
> In a strategic partnership, it might be of interest if they partner with
> Jen and Jeri and Tulip put the units together under the Commodore brand
> name. This may even lead to financial backing for development of C-One
> laptops and PDAs.
>
Jeff Ledger
want NOW... It looks like we better start using something
other than the words, "Commodore" or "Commodore 64" on our
websites. A sad day for C*mmodore hobbiests worldwide.
I for one do not want to be associated with this "Tulip"
company. A C*mmodore emulator? You've got to be joking!
I've got an idea... Let's get some people together on this,
and register the trademark "C64" and "CBM" -- Anyone know
why this wouldn't work? I'd put some money on this one.
Jeff
wildstar
Mail Lists can not be attacked. Mail Lists are not trademark violation.
They can't shut down mail lists. Mail Lists are not commercial in any way.
Just a method of users communicating about a subject.
wildstar
news:706f6242.03071...@posting.google.com:
> Guys, you'd be advised to get your copies of everything you
> want NOW... It looks like we better start using something
> other than the words, "Commodore" or "Commodore 64" on our
> websites. A sad day for C*mmodore hobbiests worldwide.
>
> I for one do not want to be associated with this "Tulip"
> company. A C*mmodore emulator? You've got to be joking!
>
> I've got an idea... Let's get some people together on this,
> and register the trademark "C64" and "CBM" -- Anyone know
> why this wouldn't work? I'd put some money on this one.
>
> Jeff
Let's not base final decisions on speculations. Has anyone received
responses from Tulip Computers. A company has all the legal power to
change there approach.
I am sure that they are looking over these email and will take some
thought here. Tulip may decide to back off us a little. Maybe target the
few sites that are using the trademarks as a corporate trademark. We have
not used it in that manner.
Jeff Ledger
> Let's not base final decisions on speculations. Has anyone received
> responses from Tulip Computers. A company has all the legal power to
> change there approach.
Sorry, I tend to get a jumpy when I see press releases that
read like the typical junk from the RIAA, Microsft, etc.
Let's cross our fingers.
Jeff
Sam Gillett
J. Robertson wrote ...
>Tulip also states in article
>* Even today there is still an extensive group of about 6 million
>loyal Commodore users and enthusiasts around the world.
>* A countless number of hobbyists and Commodore enthusiast have kept
>the community alive. An Internet search on Commodore is still good for
>about 50,000 hits.
Tulip's beancounters may tend to exaggerate a little (or a lot!). I entered
"Commodore" into a search engine today and got only 73 hits. Only 17 hits
were related to Commodore computers. The rest were on Vanderbilt
University's Commodore sports teams, or hotels with Commodore in their name.
Unless my math is screwed up, that means that the 6 million loyal Commodore
users around the world are really 8760 in number. When Tulip learns the
truth, heads may roll! Anyone wanting to hire a slightly used beancounter
should hang around outside Tulip's headquarters.
Best regards,
Sam Gillett aka Mars Probe @ Starship Intrepid 1-972-221-4088
Last 8-bit BBS in the Dallas area. Commodore lives!