What Is Abandonware?
The BS Guy
> Abandonware = Stealing from a company that isn't likely to take you to
> court.
They tell u on the sites that it is a game made after a certain date ~U
cannot buy it any more!
Bob Roseman
The BS Guy wrote in message
<7op395$a2u$1...@nclient13-gui.server.virgin.net>...
What sites? The original manufacturer/distributor? Unless a software
package has been released into 'public domain', someone still owns the
rights to the software. An independent site (and you) could be prosecuted
if they don't have the proper permissions, though that isn't very
likely(there's no money in it for the lawyers). It's like finding a coin in
the street, it isn't yours(legally) but it's acceptable to keep the coin.
After you have made a reasonable attempt to find the owner, the coin
becomes yours. Abandonware is a very 'gray' area.
I think the real crime happens when a company disbands and they don't
declare the software as 'public'!
That's my 2 pico-cents worth,
Bob R
KaL
I mean, You have an old computer but the local game store only sells new
games, what to do? Or you really want that old game, but no store sells it,
what to do? I think the copywright laws should be changed regarding
software. After say max 7-10 years the product could be distributed freely
to anyone when no profit is being made. The original company would still
keep the trademarks, logos, names as there own to use in the future though.
KaL
Bob Roseman <Bad...@worldnet.att.net> skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:7opkhe$n4h$1...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net...
Game Dame
>
> They tell u on the sites that it is a game made after a certain date
> cannot buy it any more!
>
the "abandonware" you'll find is still available commercially, whether
it be through online ordering, catalog ordering, etc. Game stores
rarely have older games, except for Electronic Boutiques, around my
area.
--
The Game Dame
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
SiberioS
>I mean, You have an old computer but the local game store only sells new
>games, what to do? Or you really want that old game, but no store sells it,
>what to do? I think the copywright laws should be changed regarding
>software. After say max 7-10 years the product could be distributed freely
>to anyone when no profit is being made. The original company would still
>keep the trademarks, logos, names as there own to use in the future though.
Technically then I should be able to steal old comics, because there not making
any money, and hell Marvel and DC get to hold the rights to the characters!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Troll News
The less you know
The more you say you know
jo...@josho.com
"KaL" <kalle.wa...@nospam.swipnet.se> wrote:
> I checked out a site, and the arguments for abandonware are good.
Cool. I'll be over to your house shortly to steal everything you haven't
used for the last 7 years: your videotapes, your toys, your software.
But hey, you'll have the right to use it all whenever you want, I
promise.
--Josh
Knight37
SiberioS <sibe...@aol.com> wrote
> >I checked out a site, and the arguments for abandonware are good.
> >I mean, You have an old computer but the local game store only sells new
> >games, what to do? Or you really want that old game, but no store sells it,
> >what to do? I think the copywright laws should be changed regarding
> >software. After say max 7-10 years the product could be distributed freely
> >to anyone when no profit is being made. The original company would still
> >keep the trademarks, logos, names as there own to use in the future though.
>
> Technically then I should be able to steal old comics, because there not
making
> any money, and hell Marvel and DC get to hold the rights to the characters!
I really hate it when people try to equate software piracy with theft of
physical objects. It is not even close to the same thing.
Who's comic book are you going to steal? Little Johnny's? Ok, so now you
have HARMED Little Johnny. If you copy Little Johnny's copy of Infocom's
Shogun, which is neigh impossible to find used, and no one is selling it
new, who have you harmed? Little Johnny still has his copy. Anyone who
can not see the difference between intellectual property "theft" and
theft of physical property is quite frankly, an idiot. And people who
know the difference but use it as an argument in the software piracy
debates is quite frankly comparing apples to oranges intentionally to
try an get around having to come up with tangible arguments.
Knight37
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> If you copy Little Johnny's copy of Infocom's
> Shogun, which is neigh impossible to find used, and no one is selling it
> new, who have you harmed?
Hehee. This isn't your lucky day. About ~30 shrinkwrapped
Shoguns have been on auction at eBay recently. :)
--
Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
Hidalgo Trading Company: <http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/>
rgcud FAQ: <http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/faq/rgcudfaq.html>
jo...@josho.com
"Knight37" <goo...@blue.net> wrote:
> I really hate it when people try to equate software piracy with theft
of
> physical objects. It is not even close to the same thing.
Spoken like a true defense lawyer! ;-)
> Who's comic book are you going to steal? Little Johnny's? Ok, so now
you
> have HARMED Little Johnny. If you copy Little Johnny's copy of
Infocom's
> Shogun, which is neigh impossible to find used, and no one is selling
it
> new, who have you harmed?
You have harmed both the company who owns the copyright, and any and all
individuals who own a personal stake in the profits of the product.
Just because an item is out-of-print does not mean that companies or
individuals have relinquished the right to REPRINT the software and sell
it at a profit. These reprints appear CONSTANTLY (witness LucasArts,
Sierra, and Activision). Even if a company goes out of business, its
property (including copyrights) may have been turned over to its
creditors, in which case the creditor may use (or sell) the copyrights
to another party.
"Abandonware" is a fiction perpetrated by thieves in order to make their
crimes sound victimless when, in fact, they have absolutely no idea whom
they may be damaging. The ease of pirating via the digital medium just
makes it easier than ever to turn a blind eye.
You may not appreciate the comparison of intellectual property to
tangible property, but that's no reason to jump to the defense of
thievery.
Paul Gilbert
<jo...@josho.com> wrote in message news:7oqefi$6hf$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <ll1s3.398$M7....@news.flash.net>,
> "Knight37" <goo...@blue.net> wrote:
>
> > new, who have you harmed?
>
> You have harmed both the company who owns the copyright, and any and
all
> individuals who own a personal stake in the profits of the product.
Bullcrap, if you'll pardon my french. That's the true words of an
anti-piracy follower. ;-). What all too many people forget when they
spout these words out is that they fail to demonstrate that any harm
has in fact taken place. Let's be honest: at root we're talking about
money, and the movement of said money from point A to point B. If
person C makes a copy of person D's software [between friends], then
the company E that wrote it has not lost *any* money unless person C
would have paid company E for the software had he not got a copy from
D.
When we're talking about games over 6-7 years old, generally they're
no longer available except in auction sites, which - remember this -
have the profits of sale going to the previous owner - not the
company, which got the profits from the original purchase years ago.
And companys like LucasArts are the exception, not the norm. Very few
companies have released full anthologies - I can only think of
Lucasarts, Legend, and Infocom [via Activision].
>
> Just because an item is out-of-print does not mean that companies or
> individuals have relinquished the right to REPRINT the software and
sell
> it at a profit. These reprints appear CONSTANTLY (witness LucasArts,
> Sierra, and Activision). Even if a company goes out of business, its
> property (including copyrights) may have been turned over to its
> creditors, in which case the creditor may use (or sell) the
copyrights
> to another party.
I agree - but generally the creditors don't give a shit about the old
software, but won't even officially release into the public domain
because it would cost money to do so. So we end up with all too money
games in legal limbo - their companies (or the companies that grabbed
their assets when they fold) don't caring about them, and not making
any profit from them.
>
> "Abandonware" is a fiction perpetrated by thieves in order to make
their
> crimes sound victimless when, in fact, they have absolutely no idea
whom
> they may be damaging. The ease of pirating via the digital medium
just
> makes it easier than ever to turn a blind eye.
Maybe because it doesn't actually harm anyone; as I demonstrated in my
earlier example. Even the lawyers recognise it's not really theft -
they had to invent terms like "intellectual" theft to try and claim
that making a copy of something was somehow still "thieving", when
commonsense shows that it clearly isn't.
> You may not appreciate the comparison of intellectual property to
> tangible property, but that's no reason to jump to the defense of
> thievery.
You may not approve of abandonware, but calling it thievery isn't
going to make it so. It's "intellectual theft", which is completely
different from thievery, in that it's a "theft" that doesn't hurt
anyone.
Josh Mandel
wrote:
>> You have harmed both the company who owns the copyright, and any and
>all
>> individuals who own a personal stake in the profits of the product.
>
>Bullcrap, if you'll pardon my french. That's the true words of an
>anti-piracy follower. ;-). What all too many people forget when they
>spout these words out is that they fail to demonstrate that any harm
>has in fact taken place. Let's be honest: at root we're talking about
>money, and the movement of said money from point A to point B. If
>person C makes a copy of person D's software [between friends], then
>the company E that wrote it has not lost *any* money unless person C
>would have paid company E for the software had he not got a copy from
>D.
Certainly we're talking about money. The people who are asking about
so-called "abandonware" are complaining that they CAN'T buy the game
through regular means.
You dismissed it summarily, but Activision has released at least a
half-dozen compilations of previously-out-of-print games.
Lucasarts...I have no idea how many compilations they've put out.
Legend (forgot about them!) has its compilation, and Sierra has also
released at least another half-dozen anthologies in the past few years
of games that haven't been available for years -- some of the games in
their anthologies are over 15 years old. Interplay has released
compilations. Broderbund has released compilations.
It's not out of line to presume that SOME of these games are the games
that "abandonware" users are pirating with the claim that they can't
pick up the games legitimately. Look on this newsgroup if you don't
believe it, such as the request (just within the past couple hours) of
someone wanting to download out-of-print Leisure Suit Larry games. The
games are all in print again in the LSL compilation. But are the
"abandonware" sites pulling these games from their sites when the
games come back into print?
Nope.
So much for their professed high-road attitude.
>And companys like LucasArts are the exception, not the norm. Very few
>companies have released full anthologies - I can only think of
>Lucasarts, Legend, and Infocom [via Activision].
Okay. Add Interplay and Sierra. And between these five companies, you
have, in fact, the companies that have produced a MAJORITY of
commercial adventure games over the past 20 years.
>You may not approve of abandonware, but calling it thievery isn't
>going to make it so. It's "intellectual theft", which is completely
>different from thievery, in that it's a "theft" that doesn't hurt
>anyone.
>
Rather, intellectual theft is merely thievery of property that doesn't
have the usual safeguards in place that would prevent it from being
stolen.
The theft does hurt people. If you don't believe that, spend the next
2 years of your life developing a game, with the royalties being some
or all of your pay for the effort. Then stand back and watch as people
duplicate it for free, trade it back and forth, destroying both its
value off the shelf and its later value as a reprint or compilation --
and tell me it's no skin off your nose.
--Josh
SiberioS
piracy) I find someone has scanned in all the pages of a really old comic book
right? Technically because it's old, and near impossible to find, I should have
the right to download all those copyrighted images and print them for my own
viewing. But if you ask anyone if this is wrong, getting images of a comic you
didn't buy they would tell you you were stealing. But the fact that you copy
some software that is old and near impossible to find, all of a sudden it is
perfectly fine by all means.
SiberioS
>the company E that wrote it has not lost *any* money unless person C
>would have paid company E for the software had he not got a copy from
>D
Okay then. I just found mp3's of an album I didn't really want to buy, but I
figure hell, wasn't going to pay for it anyways so it's just free for the
taking. I mean my 13 dollars was never going to go to them anyways so let the
theft begin!
Paul Gilbert
SiberioS <sibe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990810223425...@ng-xc1.aol.com...
> >then
> >the company E that wrote it has not lost *any* money unless person
C
> >would have paid company E for the software had he not got a copy
from
> >D
>
> Okay then. I just found mp3's of an album I didn't really want to
buy, but I
> figure hell, wasn't going to pay for it anyways so it's just free
for the
> taking. I mean my 13 dollars was never going to go to them anyways
so let the
> theft begin!
You're confusing the issues. From what you're quoting I was
demonstrating the fact that the company isn't hurt if someone makes a
copy of it's software/music/etc. if they wouldn't have paid for it
anyway. That doesn't make it right or wrong to copy it, mind you, just
that it's pure bull on the part of the company to say they've lost
money from *every* copy made. In any case, I've already argued the
subject with Fortran in another thread in the last two weeks, so I
can't really be stuffed starting it all over again. If you're
interested, just check out some of the Intellectual Property / piracy
threads.
The major point becomes whether it's right or wrong to do so.
Obviously with old games not generally available anymore more people
believe it's "ok". Indeed, the entire emulation community is based
upon playing technically illegal copies of old computer games from no
longer commercially available systems on your PC/Mac/etc. The whole
concept of abandonware in the PC world is in a similar - it may be
technically illegal, but it's never going to be stopped because too
many people see nothing *morally* wrong with it.
SiberioS
with my message directed at Abandonware downloader. But emulation is a
different beast since it emulates commercially dead hardware. As longs as PC's
come with DOS, you'll be able to run all those old programs. Also don't start
looking for abandonware until you have looked everywhere for a used or new copy
of a game. If you have yet to find it after a2 or 3 week search then yes, you
should hit the abandonware sites. But alot of people are asking for games that
are still commercially available through bundles, and their not even making an
effort to purchase it legally.
Game Dame
> The theft does hurt people. If you don't believe that, spend the next
> 2 years of your life developing a game, with the royalties being some
> or all of your pay for the effort. Then stand back and watch as people
> duplicate it for free, trade it back and forth, destroying both its
> value off the shelf and its later value as a reprint or compilation --
> and tell me it's no skin off your nose.
>
> --Josh
>
--
The Game Dame
NeilG10475
>don't start
>looking for abandonware until you have looked everywhere for a used or new
>copy
>of a game. If you have yet to find it after a2 or 3 week search then yes, you
>should hit the abandonware sites. But alot of people are asking for games
>that
>are still commercially available through bundles, and their not even making
>an
>effort to purchase it legally.
Thank you Siberios! I agree with this view, and I feel vindicated because I
got "Countdown" off an Abandonware site after contacting Access Software and
they practically laughed at me as to how to get it. Some of the people at the
company didn't even know anything about it!
katie
NeilG10475
continue to cruise along apparently unchallenged. If you have a Simpsons web
site and try to put a few pictures of Homer on there or something, Fox's
lawyers are all over you in a second.
katie
Adam Kippes
> If you have a Simpsons web site and try to put a few pictures of Homer on
> there or something, Fox's lawyers are all over you in a second.
Fox is larger than your average game company... probably by an order of
several magnitudes.
-- AK
--
adam....@pobox.com
PGP keys available from servers
Knight37
SiberioS <sibe...@aol.com> wrote
> I know about the other abandonware thread. Hell I started the whole schpiel
> with my message directed at Abandonware downloader. But emulation is a
> different beast since it emulates commercially dead hardware. As longs as PC's
> come with DOS, you'll be able to run all those old programs. Also don't start
> looking for abandonware until you have looked everywhere for a used or new
copy
> of a game. If you have yet to find it after a2 or 3 week search then yes, you
> should hit the abandonware sites. But alot of people are asking for games that
> are still commercially available through bundles, and their not even making an
> effort to purchase it legally.
This is the type of "Abandonware" that I support. I do not support piracy
of commerically viable products. I do, however, object to people equating
intellectual theft with theft of physical property. It's simply not the same.
Both are illegal, yes. Both are potentially morally wrong, but in my humble
opinion, both are also potentially morally right.
Knight37
Knight37
SiberioS <sibe...@aol.com> wrote in
> Your missing the point entirely. Let's say(to make it better relate to
software
> piracy) I find someone has scanned in all the pages of a really old comic book
> right? Technically because it's old, and near impossible to find, I should
have
> the right to download all those copyrighted images and print them for my own
> viewing. But if you ask anyone if this is wrong, getting images of a comic you
> didn't buy they would tell you you were stealing. But the fact that you copy
> some software that is old and near impossible to find, all of a sudden it is
> perfectly fine by all means.
I assume this was directed at my post but since you failed to quote it I am
not sure.
If this is your point, that stealing intellectual property of say, comic books,
is the same as stealing intellectual property of computer games, then I agree.
That's the same thing. And it is "intellectual theft". It is NOT the same thing
as stealing PHYSICAL property, however. I am not debating whether or not these
are morally right or wrong. That's an individual value judgement. My personal
belief is that both can be right AND wrong in certain circumstances.
Anyway, I agree with your policy above about spending enough time conducting
a thorough search for a title before hitting the abandonware sites. Anyone
who downloads LSL or Full Throttle just isn't looking hard enough.
Knight37
Sam Jeffreys
>
> I just thought (and continue to think) that it's really weird that these sites
> site and try to put a few pictures of Homer on there or something, Fox's
> lawyers are all over you in a second.
Actually, Abandonware sites are taken down all the time. It's just that
they quickly appear again.
-Sam
Sam Jeffreys
mostly pro-Abandonware rant * * *
My view on all this (for what it's worth):
Warez sites are very bad, IMO. They have brand new games available for
download, and anyone who downloads a new game from a Warez site is
clearly just ripping off the software publishers/developers.
Abandonware sites are not the same. If you download an ancient game
which hasn't been available since the mid-80s, then you really cannot
be harming anyone. The publishers haven't been selling it for 15 years,
so they won't lose any money if you download it. I agree, there are
Abandonware sites which are closer to the level of Warez sites, because
they offer games which (although older) are still widely available
(Doom, Monkey Island, etc). That shouldn't be allowed. But I feel that
if a game is genuinely unavailable, delisted and no longer sold or
supported by its publishers, then there isn't anything wrong with
downloading it.
Personally, I have only downloaded once or twice from Abandonware sites,
and only after trying every way I could to legally get hold of the game
in question, first. Even after downloading, I would still keep trying
to buy a copy. And if I downloaded an old game, then the publishers
re-issued it, I would buy it.
I think a *proper* Abandonware site, only offering completely
unavailable games, is a *good* thing. In my opinion (and I know other
people will disagree), it is a positive and even neccessary thing to
"keep alive" these old (often almost forgotten) games. If it wasn't for
the Abandonware sites, then many games would simply be lost forever.
I hate to think of these pieces of history, which developers put months
-or even years- of effort into creating, just being lost and forgotten.
I'm not supporting software piracy; I'm just saying that Abandonware is
currently the only way to get hold of 1000s of old software titles.
If there were big changes in the industry, and publishers re-issued
lots of their old games, or made them freeware, then there wouldn't be
such a need for Abandonware sites. But sadly, I don't think that's
going to happen...The truth is, most software companies just don't care
enough about their old titles. Abandonware is an illegal and far from
perfect way of making these old games available, but at the moment, it's
the only way there is.
-Sam
Steve Young
SiberioS wrote in message
<19990810173516...@ng-cn1.aol.com>...
>>I checked out a site, and the arguments for abandonware are good.
>>I mean, You have an old computer but the local game store only sells
new
>>games, what to do? Or you really want that old game, but no store
sells it,
>>what to do? I think the copywright laws should be changed regarding
>>software. After say max 7-10 years the product could be distributed
freely
>>to anyone when no profit is being made. The original company would
still
>>keep the trademarks, logos, names as there own to use in the future
though.
>
>Technically then I should be able to steal old comics, because there
not making
>any money, and hell Marvel and DC get to hold the rights to the
characters!
That's a silly comparision as comics are a finite resource whereas
computer game copies can be infinite. The only way you would get extra
copies of copies would be if you printed them, which would be highly
unlikely and extremely costly. Also, old comics are worth a fortune,
whuch is more than you can say about the 1000 copy of Zork or whatever
(though the original will be worth money).
Steve
Don
Fortran Dragon wrote:
>
> My glass typewriter shows Knight37 typing...
> [Snip]
> > If you copy Little Johnny's copy of Infocom's
> > Shogun, which is neigh impossible to find used, and no one is selling it
> > new, who have you harmed?
> [Snip]
>
> Hehee. This isn't your lucky day. About ~30 shrinkwrapped
> Shoguns have been on auction at eBay recently. :)
Hehee. Why pay for it when it's already available for free all over the
net?
MdmeDis
Same reason some people pay for anything rather than stealing it.
Which has basically made his point - that its easier to use stolen
material than it is to pay for it. All this "I can't find it" boils down
to so much BS, it seems. :)
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
To succeed in politics, and apparently old adventure games, it is often
necessary to rise above your morals
MdmeDis
tbo...@mindspring.com says...
>
> If anyone knows
> where any of these are commercially available to those of us reading
> this group, I'm sure someone here will be getting their wallet out.
Last time someone did that, with new still in shrinkwrap items yet, the
response was "Heehee. Why do that when its free all over the net?"
> P.P.S. Nothing at all personal, Game Dame. I think it's a common
> misconception, that so many games are still available. Would that it
> were so.
Nothing personal, Trina - but basically there isn't much misconception -
just a lot of bull by people who, when push comes to shove are not
willing to pay for what they want.
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Bumper sticker: No horn. Watch for finger
Trina Borras
>> They tell u on the sites that it is a game made after a certain date
>>U
>> cannot buy it any more!
>>
>Do you believe everything anyone tells you? I think that most of
>the "abandonware" you'll find is still available commercially, whether
>it be through online ordering, catalog ordering, etc. Game stores
>rarely have older games, except for Electronic Boutiques, around my
>area.
Dear Game Dame,
I agree, it's a cool name, rolls right off the tongue. Makes me want
to set up for a game of bid whist!
Oh, that is so untrue (although you may well not realize it). What I
would like to hear (outside of the professional dragonian
anti-abandonware group -- because they do know this score) is people
at least be honest about this. Tons of old games (to me "old" is mid
'80's to around '92, but it can be earlier/later depending on the
game) are not available anywhere retail (unless a couple turn up in a
little shop in a little town, I remember when one fellow here found a
stash of copies of Cruise for a Corpse in a local bargain bin, it was
cause for great celebration as he bought them all and sent them to
those interested -- at a time when, I might add, the game could be had
as abandonware). If you're going to find them (outside of abandonware
sites) it's going to be in auction or at the ugtz. And you can wait
for *years* depending upon how obscure they are. Do you know, e.g.,
the arcade/adventure w/rpgish overtones called Zeliard (around '89) by
Japanese Game Arts, English version produced by Sierra (with script
written by our own Josh Mandel)? I know it's on an abandonware site,
and if ever (and there are many more like it) a game deserved to be in
such a category it is that. When I put it on my want list at the ugtz
there were no others looking for it, and no one had it available. I
didn't think I'd ever find it, but in about a year someone came
through with a mint condition original (for pc). It's an odd little
game, the best little platform game I've yet to play (well, next to
Pickle Wars anyway), and if I didn't own it, believe me, I'd avail
myself of an abandonware copy (which I had done prior to getting
lucky).
Online ordering? Cdaccess.com has about the oldest games online. All
cdrom games. Are you saying that all adventure games have made it to
cdrom? Oh, there is at lease one *very* used game store online, not
many treasures there but if you do find one, you'll get no personal
attention, i.e., you will have no guarantee that the diskettes still
work. At least when I buy from someone at the ugtz, people install
diskettes for me first to make sure none has become corrupt. (I
learned to ask for this special service after I bought a copy of an
oldie still in its box with crisp manual and with diskettes in
unopened plastic container, and the fourth of four disks didn't work
.. fortunately, I found an abandonware copy of it and it had the
files missing from disk four, else I'd have respectably paid for it
and be sitting here -- self-righteously -- with a game I couldn't
play, but out of pocket a bit, and isn't *that* what a lot of this
comes down to -- that some money exchange hands, no matter who the
parties may be? Sometimes -- when there is no doubt that we're
talking about games that are no where to be bought -- I wonder, is
there some kind of capitalist worshipping mentality gone cuckoo
operating among among people who think buying games second-hand is
cool? You know people don't only buy games like Conquests of Camelot
second-hand -- they also buy Obsidian and Outcast and Thief, and
everytime they do that a *company* really is losing money, now or
potentially assuming its price will come down.)
Ok, whoever wants to take this on (and I'm sure anyone else here,
whether you feel abandonware is being unfairly smeared, for you can do
it without exaggerating the state of the market, a market in which new
adventure games aren't the best sellers, much less games like
Sorcerian and Drakkhen -- the latter being a really old Infogrames rpg
that looks -- landscapewise -- a bit like Eternam but isn't in that
class, could add more so we could come up with a nice list of very
wanted but out-of-print-maybe-forever games), I'll give you a list
some games I either have already gotten used or am still looking for,
which I know can be (or were to be at some point) found on some
abandonware sites, and you (whoever) tell me where I might buy them
online or by catalog. Operation Stealth. (My latest acquisition,
yea! It's got the prettiest copy protection card in my collection.)
Conquests of the Longbow. D/Generation. Knights of Xentar (I'm
tempted to get a crack for this because I can't see the numbers inside
the wheel, thin black font on dark red). Gold Rush. Hearts of China.
Ween: The Prophecy (a favorite Coktel of mine, it's so funny just the
other day someone on here was remarking how abominable a game it is,
just goes to show you how much personal taste sets the standard).
Emmanuelle and Geisha (first and second Coktel games). Djel (Coktel
again, from screen shots looks a bit like Ween, but I understand it's
far more primitive). Neuromancer (someone was just asking about its
availability in that thread about cyperpunk games). If anyone knows
where any of these are commercially available to those of us reading
this group, I'm sure someone here will be getting their wallet out.
Whether you/one thinks one is justified after longing for any game or
games long out of print with little likelihood of being reissued in
downloading it from an abandonware site is really beside the point.
Let's just not pretend there is no difference between Drakkhen and The
Riddle of Master Lu in terms of whether or not it's for sale retail.
And remember too, when you buy a game second hand, no one connected
with the *game*'s design and manufacture is making a red cent off of
it, and I personally, from that pov, see no difference where you get
it, at least to the game company assuming *it's* still in business. I
just happen to prefer to buy my games second-hand because I want the
boxes and their inner wealth, along with the software itself. (Which
isn't to say I'm above downloading an abandonware copy of a game,
hardly.)
Btw, speaking of *supporting companies that DO reissue old long-out-
of-print dos games* ... Adventure Soft has at last gotten all of the
kinks out of the first in its new oldies budget series. The "Horror
Pack" can now be ordered for around 19 pounds (I don't know what that
is in $$). The pack provides us a trio or thrillers, Elvira, Elvira
2, and Waxworks. Right before I found out this was in the works, I
had downloaded a copy of the first Elvira and played just a bit of the
beginning, enough to nearly make me faint. It's brutally horrifying,
and it's funny too in a pretty twisted sort of way that I just love.
As far as I know the games offer the same features (I don't, e.g.,
recall if there was voice but tend to doubt it) as in their dos
incarnations, but Adventure Soft has tweaked them to be compatible in
the win95/98 operating systems.
Anyway, if this venture of Adventure Soft's proves successful, I
believe they are quite amenable to suggestions about what games to
include in a second set of reissues. Of course, there'll only be one
if this one at least pays its own way, so, let's help make it a
success, and then we can bombard them with ideas for offering #2!
Looking forward (but wistfully with 2-1/2d in mind too) to Simon3d,
best regards,
Trina
P.S. Don, I didn't get a chance to write then, but I was completely
in sympathy with your position on those games from ... was it Access?
the other day. If so, was Countdown one of the games you were
alluding to because I couldn't find the beginning of that thread.
Maybe you could add whatever they were to that list of games we could
make if others are so inclined to participate in hopes of finding them
online or by catalog. ;)
P.P.S. Nothing at all personal, Game Dame. I think it's a common
misconception, that so many games are still available. Would that it
were so.
posted/cc'd to poster by e-mail
Noman
Trina Borras wrote:
>
>
> Oh, that is so untrue (although you may well not realize it). What I
> would like to hear (outside of the professional dragonian
> anti-abandonware group -- because they do know this score) is people
> at least be honest about this.
I had ignored this discussion until now, for I find it
useless, but Trina, your wish is my command.
Alright, I download abandonware at times, and I think
it's a >great< idea. Without it, I'd never have found Bad
Blood or Altered Destiny. Although being a somewhat ancient
creature, I had been around the time, when they were
originally released, I never got chance to buy them.
Then they disappeared. There are other titles, I can
list as well.
> Ween: The Prophecy (a favorite Coktel of mine, it's so funny just the
> other day someone on here was remarking how abominable a game it is,
> just goes to show you how much personal taste sets the standard).
yikes !! Ween was terrible, IMO. It was annoyingly linear.
In fact at any given time, you had at most two or three
screens available. Euro trash.... Goblins (from Coktel) came
later and was pretty similar, but at least it didn't try to
pretend that there was anything more to it, then advancing a
screen- random clicking until puzzles get solved - advancing a
screen - repeat.
My irrelevant 0.02$
--
Noman
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> Hehee. Why pay for it when it's already available for free all over the
> net?
I guess if you can't control yourself stealing can be easily
rationalized. Anyway, just mark this excuse down as another variation
of the eternal whine, "Everyone else is doing it".
Fortran Dragon
[Snip of crap]
> P.P.S. Nothing at all personal, Game Dame. I think it's a common
> misconception, that so many games are still available. Would that it
> were so.
Hey Trina, does this condescending tone come naturally or did you
cultivate it?
Disciple
Fortran Dragon <for...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.121df23a3...@news.alt.net...
> My glass typewriter shows Don typing...
> [Snip]
> > Hehee. Why pay for it when it's already available for free all over the
> > net?
>
> I guess if you can't control yourself stealing can be easily
> rationalized. Anyway, just mark this excuse down as another variation
> of the eternal whine, "Everyone else is doing it".
>
>
> Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
> Hidalgo Trading Company: <http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/>
> rgcud FAQ: <http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/faq/rgcudfaq.html>
Fortran Dragon <for...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.121df2b1...@news.alt.net...
How dare you accuse Trina, the Good and Gentle Goddess of the CSIPGA, you
who are on a higher high horse than *everyone* else when it comes to matters
of abandonware, of condescension? I suppose you believe yourself entitled
just because of your lofty and uncompromising moral position, but you want
to talk about the pot calling the kettle black!? Condescending, my ass! How
come you rarely, if ever, have anything to say about *games* but rather
confine yourself to talking about *illegal copies* of games, and then the
one time you deviate from your norm, it is to insult the lovely Trina who
only loves games and never has done any harm to anybody, especially not you?
What a nerve!
Trina Borras
>My glass typewriter shows Trina Borras typing...
>[Snip of crap]
>> P.P.S. Nothing at all personal, Game Dame. I think it's a common
>> misconception, that so many games are still available. Would that it
>> were so.
> Hey Trina, does this condescending tone come naturally or did you
>cultivate it?
Naturellement, mais oui!
Bob Roseman
Fortran Dragon wrote in message ...
>[Snip of crap]
And before you mess with Trina again, just remember there are 'big
brothers' hanging around! (my Assembler can beat-up your assembler with 7
bits tied (cached?) behind it's CPU! :-) )
Bob R
MdmeDis
says...
>
> Trina Borras wrote:
> >
> >
> > Oh, that is so untrue (although you may well not realize it). What I
> > would like to hear (outside of the professional dragonian
> > anti-abandonware group -- because they do know this score) is people
> > at least be honest about this.
>
> useless, but Trina, your wish is my command.
>
> Alright, I download abandonware at times, and I think
> it's a >great< idea. Without it, I'd never have found Bad
> Blood or Altered Destiny. Although being a somewhat ancient
> creature, I had been around the time, when they were
> originally released, I never got chance to buy them.
> Then they disappeared. There are other titles, I can
> list as well.
<snip>
<giggles> this is beginning to sound like the Adventure chapter of
Downloaders Anonymous:
"I'm Dick, and I download wareZ games...."
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Manspeak: "What's wrong?" = I guess sex tonight is out
of the question.
Noman
MdmeDis wrote:
>
> In article <37B3B8B3...@zzzhome.yycom>, no...@zzzhome.yycom
> says...
> >
> > Alright, I download abandonware at times, and I think
> > it's a >great< idea.
>
> <giggles> this is beginning to sound like the Adventure chapter of
> Downloaders Anonymous:
>
> "I'm Dick, and I download wareZ games...."
I can bet that, you felt this was a very smart one liner
(or two three liners) on your part. Right ? ROTFL.
If you couldn't digest that claim of mine, here are
two more pointers,
a) I 'd rather download an abandonware title, than
to buy it used from someone (unless, I really need the
manual) If my money is not going to (and can not go
to) the publishers and developers in any shape or
form, than I don't see any difference between buying
used titles and downloading abandonware, except that
one person is charging me for the software and the other
isn't. Btw, abandonware is not warez.
b) I am not posting anonymous.
Finally, I am not here to discuss whether abandonware is
right or wrong. If you find something ethically wrong with
it, then that's your opinion, and if I don't find anything
wrong with it, that's my opinion.
The legal status of abandonware, is known to all of us
so there's not much point harping about it anyway.
--
Noman
Trina Borras
mdm...@earthlink.net (MdmeDis) wrote:
>In article <7p034m$pfh$1...@nntp8.atl.mindspring.net>,
>tbo...@mindspring.com says...
>>
>> If anyone knows
>> where any of these are commercially available to those of us reading
>> this group, I'm sure someone here will be getting their wallet out.
>Last time someone did that, with new still in shrinkwrap items yet, the
>response was "Heehee. Why do that when its free all over the net?"
That's pretty misleading, paraphrasing Don's words up there out of
context, and lifting (the gist of them) right out of another thread
without including what prompted it. Don was following up to FD's
follow-up to Knight37. If you know Don, you know he is not one our
group's puerile twitterers, to speak in such manner is out of
character for him. If you don't recognize that he's mimicing FD's
oneupboyshipish tone and mirth in the face of what he'd (FD) *like* to
be Knight37's embarrassment (which isn't at all since chances are he
was using Shogun as an example, and if not then it may well *be* his
lucky day that a game he despaired of finding was actually being sold
at ebay, and in any event, there is no shame in being wrong), then
you're applying double standards to his and FD's behavior. Actually
their behavior isn't the same at all. Because FD was initiating an
uninspired put down (but it's the thought that counts). Don was
merely throwing the spotlight on what FD had just done. And what he'd
not just done was evidence that he took the whole thing very
seriously. Well, that is my theory of the dynamics at work there
anyway. (If I've projected onto you, inaptly, what your own words
would have meant had I written them, Don, please correct me.)
By the way, you never attempted to answer my own question last night.
I contend it's inconsistent with your (pl) seeming raison d'etre (to
be the implacable foe(s) of abandonware in thought word or deed) to at
the same time claim that trading (and with the advent of places like
the ugtz, it's not like what it was when you were kids ... people can
lead a trading gamer *lifestyle*, they need never buy a game retail
again, ebay's another outlet where customer meets customer with no
intermediaries) and the buying of second-hand games -- also
habitually, and for half price with the brand new ones before a couple
of weeks are over and people who played the latest games the first
week they hit the stores are already trading them for others -- is
just hunkydory even though there is *no* difference in effect --the
one you claim to care about, the health and well-being of the
companies who make the games -- between a trade and a download ...to a
company, or designer. Well, ok, the newer games are not to be found
on abandonware sites. But so many are now escaping into the traders
railway logic tells me there's got to be an infelicitious financial
impact on game companies as a result. Well. There is a horsefly in
your ointment methinks.
Oh, here is Don's quote you snipped above back in its context in case
anyone wants to read it in the light.
>Fortran Dragon wrote:
>>
>> My glass typewriter shows Knight37 typing...
>> [Snip]
>> > If you copy Little Johnny's copy of Infocom's
>> > Shogun, which is neigh impossible to find used, and no one is selling it
>> > new, who have you harmed?
>> [Snip]
>>
>> Hehee. This isn't your lucky day. About ~30 shrinkwrapped
>> Shoguns have been on auction at eBay recently. :)
>Hehee. Why pay for it when it's already available for free all over the
>net?
Also, note that FD paid no attention to Knight37's question either.
He merely used it as an opportunity to gloat about something. I'm
getting the distinctive feeling that anyone seeking *conversation*
should seek outside of your order.
>> P.P.S. Nothing at all personal, Game Dame. I think it's a common
>> misconception, that so many games are still available. Would that it
>> were so.
>Nothing personal, Trina - but basically there isn't much misconception -
Since you choose not to identify yourself, or provide some handy way
to address you, I would ask that you forswear from using my given
name. Thanks so much.
>just a lot of bull by people who, when push comes to shove are not
>willing to pay for what they want.
I have no idea really what you're talking about now (other than you're
insinuating some people somewhere have some unsavory traits of
character, no, that's but a dead end). Because if you're denying the
nonexistence of all those old games I and other collectors of old dos
games are usually in search of then you might as well claim the ugtz
is a chimera. But if you are flat out claiming (do you flat out claim
things?) that any people who claim to be in search of, oh, here's
another early Coktel game I've yet to check out due to its rarity,
Fascination, are lying or imagining their pursuit, when in truth the
Software Etc. around the corner's shelves are bulging with copies ...
jesus h. christ is all I can say. But you couldn't be saying that and
that for it'd call into question your wisdom another time I read
several of your posts, recently, when you were spouting off about how
all those old games that were no longer being made didn't deserve to
be obviously, because if they were worth it the game companies would
still be making them (peculiar concept of worth, a strictly
market-driven one perchance, this fits my other theory), and in effect
said "so what," let them die their natural deaths, find another game
to play, as though they were all of them interchangeable. I don't
envy you such an outlook on life.
Sam Jeffreys
>
> mdm...@earthlink.net (MdmeDis) wrote:
>
> >> P.P.S. Nothing at all personal, Game Dame. I think it's a common
> >> misconception, that so many games are still available. Would that it
> >> were so.
>
> >Nothing personal, Trina - but basically there isn't much misconception -
> >willing to pay for what they want.
>
> I have no idea really what you're talking about now (other than you're
> insinuating some people somewhere have some unsavory traits of
> character, no, that's but a dead end). Because if you're denying the
> nonexistence of all those old games I and other collectors of old dos
> games are usually in search of then you might as well claim the ugtz
> is a chimera. But if you are flat out claiming (do you flat out claim
> things?) that any people who claim to be in search of, oh, here's
> another early Coktel game I've yet to check out due to its rarity,
> Fascination, are lying or imagining their pursuit, when in truth the
> Software Etc. around the corner's shelves are bulging with copies ...
> jesus h. christ is all I can say. But you couldn't be saying that and
> that for it'd call into question your wisdom another time I read
> several of your posts, recently, when you were spouting off about how
> all those old games that were no longer being made didn't deserve to
> be obviously, because if they were worth it the game companies would
> still be making them (peculiar concept of worth, a strictly
> market-driven one perchance, this fits my other theory), and in effect
> said "so what," let them die their natural deaths, find another game
> to play, as though they were all of them interchangeable. I don't
> envy you such an outlook on life.
I totally agree with Trina on this. It irritates me to read the comments
in this thread, from Game Dame, Disoriented Dragon and others.
To these people: How many obscure '80s games have you actually tried to
get hold of? Please don't make statements like these on something you
clearly have little knowledge of.
There are many old games I'd love to have, and many I've searched
literally years for. It's not simply a case of going to your local used
software store and, "Oh look, here's 20 copies of <insert game title>".
I would happily pay for used copies of old games I'm searching for, and
I have, quite a few times. Even if I downloaded a title as Abandonware
(as a last resort), I would still continue looking for a 'real' copy of
it, afterwards. If, by some chance, I found one, then I would definitely
buy it.
But the truth is that most old games (particularly really old games,
and more obscure titles) are incredibly hard to get hold of, and in
many cases, almost impossible to find.
-Sam
Steve Young
Noman wrote in message <37B503C4...@zzzhome.yycom>...
>MdmeDis wrote:
>> In article <37B3B8B3...@zzzhome.yycom>, no...@zzzhome.yyco
>> >
>> > it's a >great< idea.
>>
>> <giggles> this is beginning to sound like the Adventure chapter of
>> Downloaders Anonymous:
>>
>> "I'm Dick, and I download wareZ games...."
>
>I can bet that, you felt this was a very smart one liner
>(or two three liners) on your part. Right ? ROTFL.
>
>If you couldn't digest that claim of mine, here are
>two more pointers,
>a) I 'd rather download an abandonware title, than
>to buy it used from someone (unless, I really need the
>manual) If my money is not going to (and can not go
>to) the publishers and developers in any shape or
>form, than I don't see any difference between buying
>used titles and downloading abandonware, except that
>one person is charging me for the software and the other
>isn't. Btw, abandonware is not warez.
I agree with you Noman, and I would also add that if you read the small
print on most packages, it forbids the selling of such software to a
third party. So, this is as much a so called crime against society as
downloading it from these sites, in which case you would think these
hollier than thou disciples would be cracking down on this instead of
condoning it.
Personally, the only stuff I ever download is either PD, Shareware or
like, or really old software for obsolete machines that are emulated,
and the only PC title downloaded was the Beta version of Championship
Manger 3 (which I purchased when released) due to the incompetence of
Eidos. That doesn't mean I wont in the future download an adventure
title I can't get anywhere, but at the moment I have such an abundance
of stuff to play that this is unlikely at the moment.
Like Trina, I much prefer getting the original stuff, not so much
because of my law-abidingness but rather that I like owning original
stuff if possible. By shopping around I have gained many titles over the
years, either singularly or in collections, and usually cheap. I don't
however buy over the web on sites like E-bay etc, mainly because I don't
trust them and don't think they are completely safe, and because of this
I don't like getting told all the time by the anti piracy gestapo that I
should do this if I want a title. The only time I will deal on the web,
is when I have quite a good idea about the person I'm dealing with.
The one thing that does amaze me though, is all the people who come on
these groups saying they haven't got the manuel, box etc, either because
they have lost it or the cat ate it or they chucked it out to save space
etc. I have never heard such bullocks in all my life. I can understand
getting rid of titles for financial or to make room, but then you would
get rid of the whole thing, not just keeping the discs, even though
people know you mostly need the documentation for security reasons in
most cases and as a source of reference. I know accidents happen and
things go missing and second hand stuff might be missing items, but
please lets don't hear anymore about the person who got rid of all their
merchandise to make room to live in. No one does that deliberately
surely. I know I don't and have still got software from my 8 bit days
still packaged stored away some where.
>b) I am not posting anonymous.
That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would stop
hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
they are afraid to use their own.
Steve
Nobody
Steve Young <steve...@eclipse.co.uk> wrote in message
news:93463956...@ns2.saturn.ispc.net...
>
> Noman wrote in message <37B503C4...@zzzhome.yycom>...
> >b) I am not posting anonymous.
>
>
> That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would stop
> hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
> say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
> cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
> they are afraid to use their own.
>
> Steve
I write anonymously not out of cowardice but instead for unwanted email
marketing avoidance. I think a lot of the pseudonyminous (is that a real
word? if not, it should be) posters do so for the same reason. Let's switch
this argument over to a discussion of the real a-holes of the Internet--the
email spammers! No, wait, no argument would be possible there--everyone
agrees on that! Not only that, but two-thirds of those are trying to sell
pornography, which I find offensive because I have young children; also,
young children post on these games newsgroups and are themselves direct
targets of such odious marketing efforts. Oh, the evil of it all! Anyway,
when I first started reading newsgroups, I used my real name/email address
*once* and got a barrage that took about six months to die out, so I learned
a valuable lesson.
Fortran Dragon
> Naturellement, mais oui!
Tis a pity. I was hoping for intelligent conversations.
[Score file adjusted.]
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> And before you mess with Trina again, just remember there are 'big
> brothers' hanging around! (my Assembler can beat-up your assembler with 7
> bits tied (cached?) behind it's CPU! :-) )
That's ok. I'll shift left, shift right, push down, pop up, and
byte, byte, byte!
(Ok, ok, it's an old chestnut, but I couldn't resist. :))
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> oneupboyshipish tone and mirth in the face of what he'd (FD) *like* to
> be Knight37's embarrassment
Ah, speaking for me since what I *actually* said doesn't fit your
bill, eh? What I did say, was a mild attempt at humor and irony. You
see, every time a pirate or a pirate supporter has loudly proclaimed
that a game was unavailable, I've found a copy in a matter of minutes.
You do seem to be somewhat challenged when it comes to humor. I'd
suggest you take a class on the subject. ;)
> (which isn't at all since chances are he
> was using Shogun as an example, and if not then it may well *be* his
> lucky day that a game he despaired of finding was actually being sold
> at ebay, and in any event, there is no shame in being wrong), then
> you're applying double standards to his and FD's behavior.
A major point of interest to everyone is that Knight37 hasn't
opened his wallet (nor has anyone else) to the tune of $7.50 to buy a
copy on eBay. It looks like the "hard to find" excuse is just that: an
excuse.
> Actually
> their behavior isn't the same at all. Because FD was initiating an
> uninspired put down (but it's the thought that counts).
Mind reading again? Try tea leaves instead, Trinie. You at least
have someone useful to drink after you are done being wrong about my
motives. You could, of course, have asked me and saved yourself the
effort of insert both feet.
> Don was
> merely throwing the spotlight on what FD had just done. And what he'd
> not just done was evidence that he took the whole thing very
> seriously. Well, that is my theory of the dynamics at work there
> anyway. (If I've projected onto you, inaptly, what your own words
> would have meant had I written them, Don, please correct me.)
OOo! A double standard! Wow. A complaint about them *and* an
actual usage in the same ill-formed rant. How appropriate. Well, even
though you didn't ask me I have corrected your inadequate readings of my
words.
[Snip of Trinie's ill-formed strawman]
> Well. There is a horsefly in your ointment methinks.
That horse that is stepping on your toes is the fact I never
claimed what you said. If you want to posture, fine, but I would prefer
it if you at least attempted to craft a coherent, intelligent argument.
> Oh, here is Don's quote you snipped above back in its context in case
> anyone wants to read it in the light.
[Snip]
Oh, smart move Trinie. It is always smart to imply that your
audience is too stupid to use their news reader properly.
> Also, note that FD paid no attention to Knight37's question either.
> He merely used it as an opportunity to gloat about something.
No, Trinie, I used the opportunity to make a mild joke. You
really would help your cause if you asked for clarification first.
> I'm
> getting the distinctive feeling that anyone seeking *conversation*
> should seek outside of your order.
I see you've been asleep at the wheel. In case you hadn't notice
we had this conversation already. All of Knigt37's points have be dealt
with (shot down in flames, rather) already.
[Snip]
> Since you choose not to identify yourself, or provide some handy way
> to address you, I would ask that you forswear from using my given
> name. Thanks so much.
Well, Trinie, when you show me the common courtesy of referring to
me by my proper pseudonym, then maybe I'll return the favor. But if you
want to continue to come across like a teenager trying to be a petty
little thing, why I can quite oblige you.
[Snip]
> I have no idea really what you're talking about now
Trinie, that is your entire problem. Think first, then comment.
> (other than you're
> insinuating some people somewhere have some unsavory traits of
> character, no, that's but a dead end). Because if you're denying the
> nonexistence of all those old games I and other collectors of old dos
> games are usually in search of then you might as well claim the ugtz
> is a chimera.
Check out my web site. You might notice that I buy a specific
line of old games to resell to other enthusiasts. That's why I consider
these comments about old games not being able to be found, utter
horseshit.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> I totally agree with Trina on this. It irritates me to read the comments
> in this thread, from Game Dame, Disoriented Dragon and others.
> To these people: How many obscure '80s games have you actually tried to
> get hold of?
Hundreds. I buy and resell old games.
> Please don't make statements like these on something you
> clearly have little knowledge of.
I would suggest you do the same before you make sweeping
statements. No, it isn't easy to find certain old games, but I never
claimed otherwise.
I do state that piracy is illegal and the support of it is short
sighted. Just look at UCITA in the US as a major consequence of piracy.
Don't like onerous shrinkwrap licences? UCITA makes them *law*.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would stop
> hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
> say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
> cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
> they are afraid to use their own.
<rotfl> And Noman isn't a pseudonym? Rather myopic aren't we?
Also, if I set up my newsreader to display Adam Smith instead of
Fortran Dragon, just how the hell are you going to know if that is a
pseudonym or not? One hint: You're not.
sh
(Fortran Dragon) wrote:
> [Snip] (me too)
>
> Ah, speaking for me since what I *actually* said doesn't fit
your
> bill, eh? What I did say, was a mild attempt at humor and irony.
You
> see, every time a pirate or a pirate supporter has loudly proclaimed
> that a game was unavailable, I've found a copy in a matter of minutes.
>
> You do seem to be somewhat challenged when it comes to humor.
I'd
> suggest you take a class on the subject. ;)
Oh my! Humor is one of Trina's millions of fortes, Fortran.
Apparently *somebody* doesn't read (and salivate over) her every word
because if you had that would be like saying that Don Rickles or Red
Buttons needs to take a class on humor!
>
> > (which isn't at all since chances are he
> > was using Shogun as an example, and if not then it may well *be* his
> > lucky day that a game he despaired of finding was actually being
sold
> > at ebay, and in any event, there is no shame in being wrong), then
> > you're applying double standards to his and FD's behavior.
>
> A major point of interest to everyone is that Knight37 hasn't
> opened his wallet (nor has anyone else) to the tune of $7.50 to buy a
> copy on eBay. It looks like the "hard to find" excuse is just that:
an
> excuse.
>
> > Actually
> > their behavior isn't the same at all. Because FD was initiating an
> > uninspired put down (but it's the thought that counts).
>
> Mind reading again?
She can! She can!
Try tea leaves instead, Trinie.
Please do me a favor teeny and don't call Trina Trinie because even
though she is keeny it is a bit meany.
You at least
> have someone useful to drink after you are done being wrong about my
> motives. You could, of course, have asked me and saved yourself the
> effort of insert both feet.
Did I hear something about Trina's feet? mmmmmm, Trinafeet
>
> > Don was
> > merely throwing the spotlight on what FD had just done. And what
he'd
> > not just done was evidence that he took the whole thing very
> > seriously. Well, that is my theory of the dynamics at work there
> > anyway. (If I've projected onto you, inaptly, what your own words
> > would have meant had I written them, Don, please correct me.)
>
> OOo! A double standard! Wow. A complaint about them *and* an
> actual usage in the same ill-formed rant. How appropriate. Well,
even
> though you didn't ask me I have corrected your inadequate readings of
my
> words.
Inadequate? How little you know Miss Borras! A dandy reader is she and
in no way adequate with anything, much, *much* more than adequate in
all of her endeavours.
>
> [Snip of Trinie's ill-formed strawman]
How I'd like to be TrinA's strawman, she can knock me down anytime.
> > Well. There is a horsefly in your ointment methinks.
>
> That horse that is stepping on your toes
Make it stop! Such beautiful toes shouldn't be subjected to the
ghastly, smelly hooves of a horse.
Enough! Enough! I see that your tone lacks any respect at all for the
grand Lady of the day and night and the year and the sun and the moon
and ocean too so being her humble fiancee I guess that means I must,
though I am no knight or prince or even in the least brave, slay you
Fortran Dragon. I have no sword, more of a butter knife if you must
know, so if you would kindly spread out your scaley wings and hold off
on the fire breathing for a moment so I can get at clean shot at your
heart I would be very grateful.
thanks,
Steve
MdmeDis
steve...@eclipse.co.uk says...
> That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are.
They are a virtual madam, her varied 'voices' and consist of the RL
person, the dragon persona of the Ultima Dragons Internet Chapter, and
Mdme.
> I wish people would stop
> hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
> say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
> cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
> they are afraid to use their own.
That fear, m'lad, comes from some very nasty experiences I and my
erstwhile family had as a result of me using my real name on usenet
(ironically whilst making almost identical comments to the ones you make
here) The e-mail is real, if you care to use it and assure me that you
will not make it public I will be perfectly happy to furnish you my real
name. It used to be my practice to sign my real name when in discussions
like these; because of what happened I had to stop.
Should you choose not to available yourself of this offer - which would
sadden but not surprise, and find it elsewhere - (not difficult), I
would point out that most respectable servers and many countries outlaw
'outing' a person by using their real name publicly.....
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Abandonware: name given to illegally acquired software
by people too sensitive to pirate.
MdmeDis
> I totally agree with Trina on this. It irritates me to read the comments
> in this thread, from Game Dame, Disoriented Dragon and others.
> To these people: How many obscure '80s games have you actually tried to
> get hold of?
Dozens.
> Please don't make statements like these on something you
> clearly have little knowledge of.
I have a great deal of knowledge about it, and until Borras, every time
one was cited, I (or Fortran) went and found a source for it. As she
stated (I think - she's a tad difficult to follow when she's trying to
be clever) she wasn't interested in buying used games. No guarantees
with them. Like pirate sites give warranties...
> There are many old games I'd love to have, and many I've searched
> literally years for.
There are many things that fall into that category - it comes into the
area of life's little disappointments in my book, though - not "Gee - I
want that. I can't afford it; I'm not willing to pay for it so I'll just
take it anyway"
I have always been able to find the games I've wanted; I haven't always
been able to afford them. I feel that supporting piracy is in no-ones
interests, so I don't do it.
> It's not simply a case of going to your local used
> software store and, "Oh look, here's 20 copies of <insert game title>".
> I would happily pay for used copies of old games I'm searching for, and
> I have, quite a few times. Even if I downloaded a title as Abandonware
> (as a last resort), I would still continue looking for a 'real' copy of
> it, afterwards. If, by some chance, I found one, then I would definitely
> buy it.
> But the truth is that most old games (particularly really old games,
> and more obscure titles) are incredibly hard to get hold of, and in
> many cases, almost impossible to find.
If its on a wareZ site, it ain't difficult to find. Borras indicated
that paying for used games was stupid, so why should I waste time
looking 'em up for her?
I hear what you are saying. I'll re-iterate - I think copyright is dumb
in its present format - and about to get plain nasty in its future one.
But supporting violating it and violating it are not good ways to get
companies to make stuff available, and to change copyright into a format
that benefits both producer and consumer (see my response to Borras)
MdmeDis
tbo...@mindspring.com says...
>
> mdm...@earthlink.net (MdmeDis) wrote:
>
> >In article <7p034m$pfh$1...@nntp8.atl.mindspring.net>,
> >tbo...@mindspring.com says...
> >>
> >> If anyone knows
> >> where any of these are commercially available to those of us reading
> >> this group, I'm sure someone here will be getting their wallet out.
>
> >Last time someone did that, with new still in shrinkwrap items yet, the
> >response was "Heehee. Why do that when its free all over the net?"
>
> That's pretty misleading, paraphrasing Don's words up there out of
> context, and lifting (the gist of them) right out of another thread
> without including what prompted it.
<shrug> The point, which apparently has eluded you, was rather than the
round of wallet pulling you suggest in response to being told where the
items *are* commercially available was "Why bother, when its free". Don
has stated he violates copyright on occasion.
Can you blame me for thinking he was having a blinding flash of honesty?
<Snip of your mind reading. I have an ominous feeling FD will enlighten
you from whence he comes...>
> By the way, you never attempted to answer my own question last night.
Correct. Why waste time providing the information of the location of
games - and both Fortran and I have on several occasions - when it
meets with comments like Don's, or a variety of excuses as to why you
prefer to pirate it rather than pay for it. Let me give you some:
(a) If I buy it used, the developer doesn't get the money.
Neither does he if you buy it retail.
(b) It might not work.
You mean, the pirate site warranties its products? You can't ask the
seller if he will refund your money if it doesn't? I usually agree to
that if the person is buying the game to play, and have had the same
agreement when buying myself.
(c) It doesn't hurt anyone.
It supports and encourages piracy - which last year cost the gaming
industry alone (read you, in increased product cost) $3.something
billion; it drives small producers out of business (those without the
resources to fight them) thus reducing the already very narrow field of
game producers.
The person it hurts at the end of the day is you.
> I contend it's inconsistent with your (pl) seeming raison d'etre
I will make yet another attempt to explain where I'm coming from, as
obviously you didn't read it in the previous threads.
> (to
> be the implacable foe(s) of abandonware in thought word or deed)
I'm all in favour of abandonware, and its legal existence. I want to see
copyright released when the entity that holds it is dead.
I used to think there was a chance that piracy might force the issue,
but bore in mind the caveat that it could also force a hardening of the
existing copyright laws. The latter is what appears to be happening.
Something called UCITA - essentially a uniform code for enforcement
of copyright and licence agreements is about to be adopted by the
majority of states. This little gem allows copyright holders to encode
software that can be remotely disabled, prevent you from legally
reselling your software and in effect would allow manufacturers to not
even warranty that software will do what it is supposed to do, amongst
other things. One big selling point the companies have with state
legislatures is the damage piracy does.
> to at
> the same time claim that trading (and with the advent of places like
> the ugtz, it's not like what it was when you were kids ... people can
> lead a trading gamer *lifestyle*, they need never buy a game retail
> again, ebay's another outlet where customer meets customer with no
> intermediaries) and the buying of second-hand games -- also
> habitually, and for half price with the brand new ones before a couple
> of weeks are over and people who played the latest games the first
> week they hit the stores are already trading them for others
Despite several attempts to decipher the foregoing, you've lost me
-- is
> just hunkydory even though there is *no* difference in effect
Yes. Once more with feeling - copyright, although used as a shield to
protect investment in time and money, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHO THE
DEVELOPER GETS HIS MONEY FROM. It allows a person the right of
distribution, and possibly to license and restrict use. Whether you hurt
him or not isn't the issue. When copyright exists, and it is violated,
whether or not someone is hurt is not the legal issue. First, you will
be sued or prosecuted for violating copyright. Then, the holder may
claim that he was caused hurt by that violation. The first (copyright
violation) may be upheld when the second is not. Get it?
> --the
> one you claim to care about,
Do quote that claim.
My cares are far less altruistic than that. I care about the long term
effects of copyright, its violation and its subsequent enforcement on
me, the consumer. I would like to see a situation in which both producer
and consumer are happy and protected, instead of the worsening
adversarial situation in which they find themselves currently. I simply
see violation of copyright as being threatening to companies, and more
likely to drive them into even further restrictive practices. So - I
exercise a little self restraint and live without the few things I can't
have. Unfortunately, my efforts are undermined by the myopic "gotta have
it now" crew.
the health and well-being of the
> companies who make the games -- between a trade and a download ...to a
> company, or designer. Well, ok, the newer games are not to be found
> on abandonware sites. But so many are now escaping into the traders
> railway logic tells me there's got to be an infelicitious financial
> impact on game companies as a result. Well. There is a horsefly in
> your ointment methinks.
> Oh, here is Don's quote you snipped above back in its context in case
> anyone wants to read it in the light.
>
> >Fortran Dragon wrote:
> >>
> >> My glass typewriter shows Knight37 typing...
> >> [Snip]
> >> > If you copy Little Johnny's copy of Infocom's
> >> > Shogun, which is neigh impossible to find used, and no one is selling it
> >> > new, who have you harmed?
> >> [Snip]
> >>
> >> Hehee. This isn't your lucky day. About ~30 shrinkwrapped
> >> Shoguns have been on auction at eBay recently. :)
>
> >Hehee. Why pay for it when it's already available for free all over the
> >net?
As far as repartee goes, this would rival stuff on the (grade school)
playground. Don has, in my limited experience here, exhibited an
excellent sense of humour. I just didn't recognize it was supposed to be
funny.
>
> Also, note that FD paid no attention to Knight37's question either.
That's for Fortran to deal with. Personally, I've answered it at least
half a dozen times. Lets go for another.
(1) Piracy hurts a lot of people (see above) - supporting piracy is
therefore a Bad Thing.
(2) Violating someone's legally given rights because you can't exercise
a bit of self control is a Bad Thing. Bit like getting a deed to a
house, and leaving it empty for a few months because its not convenient
for you to move into currently and having squatters move in and rent it
out, because its not 'hurting anyone'
> He merely used it as an opportunity to gloat about something. I'm
> getting the distinctive feeling that anyone seeking *conversation*
> should seek outside of your order.
>
> >> P.P.S. Nothing at all personal, Game Dame. I think it's a common
> >> misconception, that so many games are still available. Would that it
> >> were so.
>
> >Nothing personal, Trina - but basically there isn't much misconception -
>
> Since you choose not to identify yourself, or provide some handy way
> to address you, I would ask that you forswear from using my given
> name. Thanks so much.
Disoriented is how I identify myself, and doesn't appear to cause
anyone else problems. You didn't have a similar problem with Game Dame's
pseudonym - perhaps Disoriented has too many syllables for you?
If you don't like being addressed as Trina, I suggest you don't sign
yourself that-a way. I will in future refer to you as the formally
correct Borras, if you prefer.
>
> >just a lot of bull by people who, when push comes to shove are not
> >willing to pay for what they want.
>
> I have no idea really what you're talking about now
You're comments have given every indication of not understanding what
I've been talking about all along. To clarify - if the software is
available to a pirate, its available, period.
> I don't envy you such an outlook on life.
I've given a number of real reasons I don't go along with piracy - I
also can't resist gigging fools and hypocrites. You know the ones - they
scream like raped apes when some poor newbie comes into a group asking
where (s)he can download games, then three posts later go into some coy
confession about how they do the very same thing.
If you don't like being called for illegal activity, either don't do it
or stop blabbing about it.
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Abandonware: Name given to illegally acquired software by people too
sensitive to pirate.
MdmeDis
says...
>
>
> MdmeDis wrote:
> >
> > In article <37B3B8B3...@zzzhome.yycom>, no...@zzzhome.yycom
> > says...
> I can bet that, you felt this was a very smart one liner
> (or two three liners) on your part. Right ? ROTFL.
Yeah - an attempt to lighten things up. Silly me.
>
> If you couldn't digest that claim of mine, here are
> two more pointers,
> a) I 'd rather download an abandonware title, than
> to buy it used from someone (unless, I really need the
> manual) If my money is not going to (and can not go
> to) the publishers and developers in any shape or
> form, than I don't see any difference between buying
> used titles and downloading abandonware,
Then you probably don't see the difference between buying a used car and
taking one left by its owner at the roadside, and using it for a while.
> except that
> one person is charging me for the software and the other
> isn't.
Mmmm. The same can be said about most stolen goods also.
Lets try to put this to bed once and for all. When you buy a game, new
or used, the developer/manufacturer ALREADY HAS HIS MONEY. The retailer
already has paid the developer all the money he is going to get, so
unless you buy all your new games directly from the game company none of
your purchase goes to the developer. (and yes, to the anal out there, I
do know how the large chains operate..) No money from your purchase goes
directly to him in either case.
So - if you are basing your rationale on the developer not getting
money directly from you, then logically you won't have a problem with
downloading ANYTHING, including just released games.
Secondly, copyright isn't about whether or not the developer gets his
money.... ( I just like repeating that ad infinitum...)
> Btw, abandonware is not warez.
If something has a copyright and is being made available for download
without the copyright holders permission, it is warez.
> b) I am not posting anonymous.
So no...@zzzhome.yycom is your real name and e-mail address? And if you
were, would it make a difference to what you have to say?
> Finally, I am not here to discuss whether abandonware is
> right or wrong.
> If you find something ethically wrong with
> it, then that's your opinion, and if I don't find anything
> wrong with it, that's my opinion.
> The legal status of abandonware, is known to all of us
> so there's not much point harping about it anyway.
Translation: All my justifications for using wareZ have been shot down,
so I don't want to talk about it any more.
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Abandonware: name given to illegally acquired software
Gene Wirchenko
[snip]
>How dare you accuse Trina, the Good and Gentle Goddess of the CSIPGA, you
>who are on a higher high horse than *everyone* else when it comes to matters
>of abandonware, of condescension? I suppose you believe yourself entitled
>just because of your lofty and uncompromising moral position, but you want
>to talk about the pot calling the kettle black!? Condescending, my ass! How
>come you rarely, if ever, have anything to say about *games* but rather
>confine yourself to talking about *illegal copies* of games, and then the
>one time you deviate from your norm, it is to insult the lovely Trina who
>only loves games and never has done any harm to anybody, especially not you?
>What a nerve!
Good sarcasm!
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> How dare you accuse Trina, the Good and Gentle Goddess of the CSIPGA, you
> who are on a higher high horse than *everyone* else when it comes to matters
> of abandonware, of condescension?
<shrug> In case you hadn't noticed, I have studiously avoided
dealing with the moral issues on this subject. So, care to inform
yourself about what I really said?
> I suppose you believe yourself entitled
> just because of your lofty and uncompromising moral position, but you want
> to talk about the pot calling the kettle black!?
Do you have a problem with people replying in kind?
> Condescending, my ass! How
> come you rarely, if ever, have anything to say about *games* but rather
> confine yourself to talking about *illegal copies* of games, and then the
> one time you deviate from your norm, it is to insult the lovely Trina who
> only loves games and never has done any harm to anybody, especially not you?
> What a nerve!
I guess you didn't read Trinie's little comments about me.
Misrepresenting what I said to further her own ends *is* intellectually
dishonest in most people's book.
Then again, I spend my time *helping* people find old games, but
actually making such an effort seems to be beyond certain people here.
They would rather whine about it or steal the games.
[Score file adjusted -- I'm sure you'll be happy being lower than
Trinie. :)]
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> Please do me a favor teeny and don't call Trina Trinie because even
> though she is keeny it is a bit meany.
No. Since Trinie complained about politeness and then didn't show
any, she doesn't get to be the recipient of politeness herself. If she
wants to play that particular game, so can I.
[Snip]
> Inadequate? How little you know Miss Borras! A dandy reader is she and
> in no way adequate with anything
[Snip]
You know, I'm was tempted to cut everything and agree with you
that she is inadequate. :) Watch your phrasing.
Sam Jeffreys
>
> My glass typewriter shows Sam Jeffreys typing...
> [Snip]
> > I totally agree with Trina on this. It irritates me to read the comments
> > in this thread, from Game Dame, Disoriented Dragon and others.
> > To these people: How many obscure '80s games have you actually tried to
> > get hold of?
>
>
> > clearly have little knowledge of.
>
> statements. No, it isn't easy to find certain old games, but I never
> claimed otherwise.
And I never said you did. I was referring to someone called Disoriented
Dragon - not you (Fortran Dragon).
-Sam
Knight37
> >tbo...@mindspring.com says...
> >> If anyone knows
> >> where any of these are commercially available to those of us reading
> >> this group, I'm sure someone here will be getting their wallet out.
> mdm...@earthlink.net (MdmeDis) wrote:
> >Last time someone did that, with new still in shrinkwrap items yet, the
> >response was "Heehee. Why do that when its free all over the net?"
Trina Borras <tbo...@mindspring.com> wrote
> That's pretty misleading, paraphrasing Don's words up there out of
> context, and lifting (the gist of them) right out of another thread
> without including what prompted it. Don was following up to FD's
> follow-up to Knight37. If you know Don, you know he is not one our
> group's puerile twitterers, to speak in such manner is out of
> character for him. If you don't recognize that he's mimicing FD's
> oneupboyshipish tone and mirth in the face of what he'd (FD) *like* to
> be Knight37's embarrassment (which isn't at all since chances are he
> was using Shogun as an example, and if not then it may well *be* his
> lucky day that a game he despaired of finding was actually being sold
> at ebay, and in any event, there is no shame in being wrong), then
> you're applying double standards to his and FD's behavior. Actually
> their behavior isn't the same at all. Because FD was initiating an
> uninspired put down (but it's the thought that counts). Don was
> merely throwing the spotlight on what FD had just done. And what he'd
> not just done was evidence that he took the whole thing very
> seriously. Well, that is my theory of the dynamics at work there
> anyway. (If I've projected onto you, inaptly, what your own words
> would have meant had I written them, Don, please correct me.)
<snip>
Wow. Uh, I wasn't really offended at what Fortran had said. I didn't
really give a crap about the trite little "why do that when we can download
it",
and yes, I was simply using Shogun as an example, which may not have been
such a good example AT THIS TIME (even though in the past I've had a
really tough time tracking it down, which I did manage to do, and yes, I do
own it legally), but it is a good example in that, 1. It's currently out of
print,
2. No one has it on any current re-released compilations that I've seen
(yes,
I know it was on LTOI2 but that's about as hard to find as Shogun itself
now),
and 2. The only way you can get it is to buy a used copy or download it
from an abandonware site. And tracking down a used copy can sometimes
be difficult (it just so happens that when I wrote this there were quite a
few
available at that time). I would not be upset if I saw Shogun on an
abandonware
site. If Activision had any real interest in making money off of it, they
would
have rereleased it on the Masterpieces of Infocom CD. The fact that the
estate of James Clavell would want money for that and that's why they chose
not to do it just makes it even more obvious that it's not really
commercially
viable, and thus, even more worthy of the term "abandonware." All of this
is my humble opinion, of course.
Knight37
Knight37
Fortran Dragon <for...@earthlink.net> wrote
> A major point of interest to everyone is that Knight37 hasn't
> opened his wallet (nor has anyone else) to the tune of $7.50 to buy a
> copy on eBay. It looks like the "hard to find" excuse is just that: an
> excuse.
That's because I already have it. Before you accuse me of something
know the facts, mister.
> I see you've been asleep at the wheel. In case you hadn't notice
> we had this conversation already. All of Knigt37's points have be dealt
> with (shot down in flames, rather) already.
Whatever. In your eyes maybe, but not in mine. I stand by my statement
that Shogun is hard to find. Just because it is available now on ebay
doesn't mean it is readily available. And that's just one example, and yes
I could list a lot of others. Please point me to where I can buy copies
of Magnetic Scrolls' The Pawn and Knight Orc, pretty please?
And anyway that's beside the point. Buying a game USED is not helping
the original authors anymore than downloading from abandonware does.
Knight37
Knight37
MdmeDis <mdm...@earthlink.net> wrote
> > Also, note that FD paid no attention to Knight37's question either.
>
> That's for Fortran to deal with. Personally, I've answered it at least
> half a dozen times. Lets go for another.
>
> (1) Piracy hurts a lot of people (see above) - supporting piracy is
> therefore a Bad Thing.
If you mean software piracy in general, I agree. If you're including
abandonware along with the WaR3z D00dZ, then I am afraid,
I completely disagree. At any rate, it's one of those things that is
really unprovable, so there is no real point arguing about it.
> (2) Violating someone's legally given rights because you can't exercise
> a bit of self control is a Bad Thing. Bit like getting a deed to a
> house, and leaving it empty for a few months because its not convenient
> for you to move into currently and having squatters move in and rent it
> out, because its not 'hurting anyone'
There we go trying to equate physical property theft with intellectual
property theft. <sigh>
Knight37
Knight37
Steve Young <steve...@eclipse.co.uk> wrote
> >b) I am not posting anonymous.
> That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would stop
> hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
> say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
> cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
> they are afraid to use their own.
There are a lot of reasons to use pseudonymns, not the least of which is
that I don't want my freakin' real name posted all over the 'net so that
I can get a lot of spam or some sicko decides to hunt me down, etc.
I am not afraid that I might say something someone doesn't like. If
you are curious to find out who I really am, then send me some email
and we'll chat.
Knight37 at flash dot net
Noman Ahmad
MdmeDis wrote:
>
> In article <37B503C4...@zzzhome.yycom>, no...@zzzhome.yycom
> says...
> >
> > If you couldn't digest that claim of mine, here are
> > two more pointers,
> > a) I 'd rather download an abandonware title, than
> > to buy it used from someone (unless, I really need the
> > manual) If my money is not going to (and can not go
> > to) the publishers and developers in any shape or
> > form, than I don't see any difference between buying
> > used titles and downloading abandonware,
>
> Then you probably don't see the difference between buying a used car and
> taking one left by its owner at the roadside, and using it for a while.
If you seriously believe that this one is a good and
pertinent analogy, I am sorry to say, that you are a bigger
idiot than I thought.
>
> > except that
> > one person is charging me for the software and the other
> > isn't.
>
> Mmmm. The same can be said about most stolen goods also.
mmmm.. no you can't.
> [Rest of the irrelevant stuff snipped]
>
> > b) I am not posting anonymous.
>
> So no...@zzzhome.yycom is your real name and e-mail address?
Thin ice, dude (or dudette). Very thin ice.
> And if you
> were, would it make a difference to what you have to say?
I was just replying to your initial comment about people
posting anonymously when writing about this issue. And you
were following up on my post at that time.
> > Finally, I am not here to discuss whether abandonware is
> > right or wrong.
> > If you find something ethically wrong with
> > it, then that's your opinion, and if I don't find anything
> > wrong with it, that's my opinion.
>
> > The legal status of abandonware, is known to all of us
> > so there's not much point harping about it anyway.
>
> Translation: All my justifications for using wareZ have been shot down,
> so I don't want to talk about it any more.
Whatever.
--
Noman
PS: If you want people laughing at you, then continue this
exchange. Because I sure am enjoying it.
Trina Borras
>> It's not simply a case of going to your local used
>> software store and, "Oh look, here's 20 copies of <insert game title>".
>> I would happily pay for used copies of old games I'm searching for, and
>> I have, quite a few times. Even if I downloaded a title as Abandonware
>> (as a last resort), I would still continue looking for a 'real' copy of
>> it, afterwards. If, by some chance, I found one, then I would definitely
>> buy it.
>> But the truth is that most old games (particularly really old games,
>> and more obscure titles) are incredibly hard to get hold of, and in
>> many cases, almost impossible to find.
>If its on a wareZ site, it ain't difficult to find. Borras indicated
>that paying for used games was stupid, so why should I waste time
>looking 'em up for her?
I neither said nor "indicated" any such thing. You have been exhibi-
ting fanciful linguistic behavior unbecoming a dragon disoriented or
no. You don't know me, you barged in on me with no formalities and an
attitude. And when you did you misrepresented Don. Now you are
misrepresenting me, don't you have enough intellectual ammo to work
with without having to resort to misstating the views of those with
whom you disagree? Or is it I didn't make myself clear? Let me go
over what I said, with further details, so there will be no more
misunderstandings and I can back get to more stimulating projects,
such as writing to that simply *adorable* lad who was having problems
assembling that skeleton in TL.
What I did say was that I found it risky to buy games from *used
games online stores* because *they* can't guarantee the condition of
all the software they sell and when you're dealing w/old diskettes no
matter even that they be pristine in the sense that no one has used
them you've got a 50% chance (this is my experience over the years
buying used old games) one or more disks will be corrupt.
Then I said that there is a way around this potential problem. And
that is to ask those from whom you buy oldies (at the ugtz) if they'd
mind installing them on their own machines first to test that none of
the disks are corrupt. Every person I've asked to do so for me has
been more than happy to and all the diskette games I've bought have
been in perfect condition.
What I did say was that once, buying an oldie brand new, one of the
diskettes was corrupted, and that I'd had to resort to an abandonware
copy to fill in the files that I could only assume were on disk 4,
the disk that didn't work. I was so glad that day that there was
abandonware to turn to since I got the game to work and didn't have
to inconvenience myself or J by all the hassle of returning the
game (since I copied the missing files on to another diskette of
my own just in case I ever need to reinstall it).
Other than that, I said I'd downloaded and played Zeliard a bit
before I was lucky enough to land a *real* (= in my possession) copy
through the ugtz. I also stated that I'd downloaded a copy of Elvira
1 which I shelved as soon as I heard that Adventure Soft was planning
on reissuing that classic along with a couple of others to inaugurate
their new budget reissue series. (Folks -- those of you who are
*really* interested in old games staying in circulation -- check out
Adventuresoft's website about this fine "horror" pack, because if we
support this effort there will be more old dos games, fixed up for
win95/98, to come from them!)
Here are no instances being reported of my not buying a copy of a
game I wanted. I have only said, in effect, that I have used
abandonware to my advantage on three occasions, none of which in-
volved not buying the exact same game (once I already had done so,
the next time I did so at the first opportunity, and now I'm about
to buy the third which has just been published).
If this is the price one has to pay for making utterances in the
presence of one of your order, having to go back and correct the
record and say the same thing all over again because of your blatant
and oh so knowing mangling of statements to reflect other than
reality, statements which get farther from the truth as they continue
to be recycled and further away from the source document, for that is
the nature of rumor, then no wonder you don't have more people signing
up for your colloqies and that you don't use your real name.
Do watch it with your word choice from now on. I hardly think
your pride or whatever's motivating you is worth risking being
accused of libel for.
By the way, Knight37 and my favorite buddy on this group, Nobody:
I've nothing against pseudonyms, on the contrary I think they can
be a lot of fun. I use them sometimes too although I just do it
with my regular e-mail address (you may have met my secretary,
the unemployed child-naming consultant, Doria Gray? and most re-
cently I did not eschew a visit to some ancient archeological digs
in Egypt for the purpose of digging up some cool mummies), and I
find the entire subject of pseudonymity fascinating, especially in
relation to to novel writing. Anyway, there is a *class* of use-
netter who employ them not to protect themselves from spam, or for
fun, or to ward off unwanted e-mail, and various assorted other legit
reasons (unless secondarily), but to *hide behind*. Trolls. Capiche
guys?
Borras
P.S. Fwiw, and since he's not likely to deem it worth his time
to counter your not-quite-allegation, that is unless he's
in one of his mischievous moods (and woe betide thee if he
is!) ... yes, Noman's his name. (Oh, tsk. It's not an
Anglo name, no wonder you became suspicious.) And do you
*really* need a lesson on spotting spam blockers in real
e-mail addresses?
MdmeDis
So was he.
Interesting comment that. Fortran is saying the same as me - so why is
it that I "clearly have little knowledge" but he apparently does?
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Womanspeak: You're certainly attentive tonight = is
sex all you ever think about?
MdmeDis
says...
>
> MdmeDis <mdm...@earthlink.net> wrote
> > (2) Violating someone's legally given rights because you can't exercise
> > a bit of self control is a Bad Thing. Bit like getting a deed to a
> > house, and leaving it empty for a few months because its not convenient
> > for you to move into currently and having squatters move in and rent it
> > out, because its not 'hurting anyone'
>
> There we go trying to equate physical property theft with intellectual
> property theft. <sigh>
Property is property, be it intellectual or physical, and rights of use
- which we are talking about - are given legally to both. Essentially if
you won't accept that fact, a discussion isn't possible.
The above (2) doesn't involve theft or physical property in either
case, which is why I chose it - it involves right of use. No one is
stealing the house - just like no-one is stealing the CD, DVD or floppy
that the software is on. They are using what the house provides, shelter
and protection - and supplying that for others to use on the grounds
that the person given the legal right of use has abandoned it.
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
MdmeDis
says...
>
>
> MdmeDis wrote:
> If you seriously believe that this one is a good and
> pertinent analogy, I am sorry to say, that you are a bigger
> idiot than I thought.
Translation: I can't provide a valid argument, so I'm going to call you
names.
> >
> > > except that
> > > one person is charging me for the software and the other
> > > isn't.
> >
> > Mmmm. The same can be said about most stolen goods also.
>
> mmmm.. no you can't.
See above, sans namecalling.
> > [Rest of the irrelevant stuff snipped]
> >
> > > b) I am not posting anonymous.
> >
> > So no...@zzzhome.yycom is your real name and e-mail address?
>
> Thin ice, dude (or dudette). Very thin ice.
Elucidate - or is this more of the above?
> > And if you
> > were, would it make a difference to what you have to say?
>
> I was just replying to your initial comment about people
> posting anonymously when writing about this issue. And you
> were following up on my post at that time.
Yes. And this addresses my point how?
I didn't, incidentally suggest you did post anonymously. Words of one
syllable, slowly - it - was - a - joke. I won't let it happen again, I
promise.
> PS: If you want people laughing at you, then continue this
> exchange. Because I sure am enjoying it.
Exchange is way too strong a word. For that, you need both to express
ideas and opinions. In the case of you and I, I express an opinion, give
reasons for it and you say "You're wrong and a silly poo-poo, but I
don't want to talk about it..."
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
Manspeak: "Let's talk" = I'm trying to impress you by showing that
I am a deep person and then maybe you'll have sex with me.
BoGus
I think I'll call myself Steve Young from now on... ;-)
Knight37 wrote in message <27ot3.577$E.1...@news.flash.net>...
>
>Steve Young <steve...@eclipse.co.uk> wrote
>
>> >b) I am not posting anonymous.
MdmeDis
tbo...@mindspring.com says...
> mdm...@earthlink.net (MdmeDis) wrote:
> >If its on a wareZ site, it ain't difficult to find. Borras indicated
> >that paying for used games was stupid, so why should I waste time
> >looking 'em up for her?
>
> I neither said nor "indicated" any such thing.
<Quote>
.. fortunately, I found an abandonware copy of it and it had the
files missing from disk four, else I'd have respectably paid for it
and be sitting here -- self-righteously -- with a game I couldn't
play, but out of pocket a bit, and isn't *that* what a lot of this
comes down to -- that some money exchange hands, no matter who the
parties may be?
</Quote>
> You have been exhibi-
> ting fanciful linguistic behavior unbecoming a dragon disoriented or
> no.
Your inability to comprehend plain English has little bearing on my
linguistic behaviour.
> You don't know me, you barged in on me with no formalities and an
> attitude.
That's usenet for you, sweetheart. It didn't say alt.borras.fan in the
headers, although it could have....
> And when you did you misrepresented Don.
I'll let him decide that, given that you aren't going to accept the
fact, despite being told twice, that I took him seriously.
> Now you are
> misrepresenting me, don't you have enough intellectual ammo to work
> with without having to resort to misstating the views of those with
> whom you disagree?
I'm beginning to think you wouldn't recognize intellect if it bit you on
the bottom, so the point isn't even moot.
> Or is it I didn't make myself clear?
Bingo!
> Let me go
> over what I said, with further details, so there will be no more
> misunderstandings and I can back get to more stimulating projects,
Nothing too challenging I hope - you might try sentence structure
sometime, though - then in a year or five you'll be ready for
paragraphs.
> What I did say was that I found it risky to buy games from *used
> games online stores* because *they* can't guarantee the condition of
> all the software they sell and when you're dealing w/old diskettes no
> matter even that they be pristine in the sense that no one has used
> them you've got a 50% chance (this is my experience over the years
> buying used old games) one or more disks will be corrupt.
OK. So telling you where they are is going to be a waste of time, no?
> Then I said that there is a way around this potential problem.
There is. I've already stated it, but I'll try again. Ask the seller if
they will refund your money if it doesn't work - just like you do with a
new game and a retail store. If they don't, don't buy it. What's
difficult about that?
And
> that is to ask those from whom you buy oldies (at the ugtz) if they'd
> mind installing them on their own machines first to test that none of
> the disks are corrupt. Every person I've asked to do so for me has
> been more than happy to and all the diskette games I've bought have
> been in perfect condition.
YES! Good girl. you're getting the hang of it.
>
> What I did say was that once, buying an oldie brand new, one of the
> diskettes was corrupted, and that I'd had to resort to an abandonware
> copy to fill in the files that I could only assume were on disk 4,
> the disk that didn't work.
Then according to all we've been through above, you should have returned
it and got your money back. But you seem to think it is some
justification for you to indulge in piracy - so, no matter where I tell
you stuff is, your actions indicate you are going to do it anyway, so
I'm not going to waste my time. Get it?
> I was so glad that day that there was
> abandonware to turn to since I got the game to work and didn't have
> to inconvenience myself or J by all the hassle of returning the
> game (since I copied the missing files on to another diskette of
> my own just in case I ever need to reinstall it).
Doesn't alter or justify the fact you are a pirate....
> Other than that, I said I'd downloaded and played Zeliard a bit
> before I was lucky enough to land a *real* (= in my possession) copy
> through the ugtz. I also stated that I'd downloaded a copy of Elvira
> 1 which I shelved as soon as I heard that Adventure Soft was planning
> on reissuing that classic along with a couple of others to inaugurate
> their new budget reissue series.
None of which alters the fact you are behaving illegally (assuming none
of the games have been released by the copyright holders)
You've also proved one of the main points about abandonware NOT being
such, but the fact you wrote what you did indicates the whole thing is
completely over your head.
(Folks -- those of you who are
> *really* interested in old games staying in circulation -- check out
> Adventuresoft's website about this fine "horror" pack, because if we
> support this effort there will be more old dos games, fixed up for
> win95/98, to come from them!)
Or http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/
> Here are no instances being reported of my not buying a copy of a
> game I wanted. I have only said, in effect, that I have used
> abandonware to my advantage on three occasions,none of which in-
> volved not buying the exact same game (once I already had done so,
> the next time I did so at the first opportunity, and now I'm about
> to buy the third which has just been published).
"Your Honor, I only committed three crimes"....
>
> If this is the price one has to pay for making utterances in the
> presence of one of your order, having to go back and correct the
> record and say the same thing all over again because of your blatant
> and oh so knowing mangling of statements to reflect other than
> reality, statements which get farther from the truth as they continue
> to be recycled and further away from the source document, for that is
> the nature of rumor, then no wonder you don't have more people signing
> up for your colloqies and that you don't use your real name.
To sum up, then - you either can't or won't respond to any of the
issues, preferring rather to resort to personal attack and innuendo.
> Do watch it with your word choice from now on.
Fortran seemed a bit upset with your efforts along these lines. Maybe a
little more practice of what you preach would improve your credibility?
> I hardly think
> your pride or whatever's motivating you is worth risking being
> accused of libel for.
I'm usually very careful with my word choice and unlike yourself, I
don't do "interpretations". I make mistakes on occasion when it comes to
comprehending what a person meant and will immediately admit so when the
*poster* informs me, and apologize as necessary. If they flat lie,
however - that's a different story.
> Anyway, there is a *class* of use-
> netter who employ them not to protect themselves from spam, or for
> fun, or to ward off unwanted e-mail, and various assorted other legit
> reasons (unless secondarily), but to *hide behind*. Trolls. Capiche
> guys?
My e-mail is genuine; my pseudonym is quite obviously that - if I
really wanted to hide, I'd call myself Faye Withingham or something and
we wouldn't be having this asinine conversation; I have explained why I
use a pseudonym and I have offered to give my given name to any regular
here willing to assure me they won't make it public - several people
know it already.
> P.S. Fwiw, and since he's not likely to deem it worth his time
> to counter your not-quite-allegation,
Wrong *again*. He responded, although he didn't counter anything. I
didn't allege anything, I asked him a question. I didn't know if Noman
was his real name.
> that is unless he's
> in one of his mischievous moods (and woe betide thee if he
> is!) ... yes, Noman's his name. (Oh, tsk. It's not an
> Anglo name, no wonder you became suspicious.) And do you
> *really* need a lesson on spotting spam blockers in real
> e-mail addresses?
<gasp> you mean that wasn't his *real* e-mail? Oh, my hat - he must've
been attempting to hide his identity for some devious reason....
He uses spam blockers to avoid harassment; I use a pseudonym for the
same reason. Anything else you have a hair up your backside about?
You do realize this has been one long personal attack on your part? That
you have not answered *any* of the software/piracy issues, preferring
rather to insinuate I'm lying and trolling? If you wanna play flamewar,
I'm lots better at it than you..... I was hoping to get away from that
when I came here, though.
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
DisDefinitions: You're twisting my words = I just said something
incredibly dumb and I'm trying to wriggle out of it.
MdmeDis
says...
> And anyway that's beside the point. Buying a game USED is not helping
> the original authors anymore than downloading from abandonware does.
Neither is buying one new, unless you are buying it from the authors. We
are not talking about helping the original authors. We are talking
about violating the rights given to them by law....
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
DisDefinitions: If you believe that, I pity you = I've missed the point
again.
B.C.
thoughts..............I am off to the shop buying a
cdwriter.....................
Just joking, just joking!!!!!!!!!!!
B.C.
Don
MdmeDis wrote:
>
> In article <37B24801...@no.spam>, D...@no.spam says...
> > Fortran Dragon wrote:
> > > Hehee. This isn't your lucky day. About ~30 shrinkwrapped
> > > Shoguns have been on auction at eBay recently. :)
> >
> > Hehee. Why pay for it when it's already available for free all over the
> > net?
>
> Same reason some people pay for anything rather than stealing it.
>
> Which has basically made his point - that its easier to use stolen
> material than it is to pay for it. All this "I can't find it" boils down
> to so much BS, it seems. :)
Oh, can't you see that I was just being facetious and mockingly
reiterating FD's condescending tone? Most of these requests for
abandonware are from teenagers who see nothing wrong with downloading
programs off the net, and nothing we can say is going to change their
mind. In fact, if you know teenagers, all of the ranting, raving, name
calling, and sarcasm directed at them on here will probably just make
them more determined to look for warez instead of buying the games.
I know you don't agree with me, but this game has been on the same
abandonware sites for years. The sites I'm familiar with have a notice
to the copyright holders that they will remove any games upon their
request. Obviously, the copyright holders don't care that their game is
being freely distributed, or they'd make that request. I just don't see
it as theft when the copyright holders allow their games to remain
there, and I don't believe they are unaware that the games are there
since they are easily found on any search engine.
Noman
MdmeDis wrote:
>
> In article <37B61B94...@zzzhome.yycom>, no...@zzzhome.yycom
> says...
> >
> >
> > MdmeDis wrote:
>
> > If you seriously believe that this one is a good and
> > pertinent analogy, I am sorry to say, that you are a bigger
> > idiot than I thought.
>
> Translation: I can't provide a valid argument, so I'm going to call you
> names.
Just the facts.
I don't call names.
> > > > except that
> > > > one person is charging me for the (used) software and the other
> > > > isn't.
> > >
> > > Mmmm. The same can be said about most stolen goods also.
> >
> > mmmm.. no you can't.
>
> See above, sans namecalling.
okay, let me add it then,
mmmm.. no idiot, you can't.
> > PS: If you want people laughing at you, then continue this
> > exchange. Because I sure am enjoying it.
>
> Exchange is way too strong a word. For that, you need both to express
> ideas and opinions. In the case of you and I, I express an opinion, give
> reasons for it and you say "You're wrong and a silly poo-poo, but I
> don't want to talk about it..."
You are wrong and a silly poo-poo, but I don't want to talk
about it, to a person who doesn't seem to understand anything
at all (aka, idiot)
For your sake, this is my last post in this thread (please
bless this parting line, with your translation, I'd like to
read that)
--
Noman, ROTFL
PS: Had you understood my first mail (instead of translating it
with your own pre conceived views), and replied with
something even remotely relevant to it, I might have kept
the discussion on topic.
Bob Roseman
sh wrote in message <7p4m88$76f$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
[Snip]
>>
> I have no sword, more of a butter knife if you must
>know, so if you would kindly spread out your scaley wings and hold off
>on the fire breathing for a moment so I can get at clean shot at your
>heart I would be very grateful.
Hi Steve.
It's been said that 'the pen is mightier than the sword'. Since we are
using electronic media, maybe shove a keyboard up his ............
Bob ' :-) ' R
Nobody
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.endless.argument.about.abandonware, and there you can
discuss the topic until the end of time while we get back to discussing
*gasp* adventure games. This argument has popped up continuously since I've
been reading this group, and it peters out only when the two (it always gets
down to two) arguers finally get tired of typing the same thing over and
over again. Then it rears its ugly head again next time somebody uses any
kind of word with a "z" at the end.
So, Disoriented and Fortran Dragons, I'll say it--your moral fiber is beyond
reproach, and yet you have probably made no converts here, except perhaps
for Sarah Price (or was it Sarah Jayne Balfour?) (or are they one and the
same?), who used to freely offer up CD-Rs of her games anytime anyone
mentioned he/she was looking for a game and who now has taken the opposite
stance, and I certainly don't think you have earned anybody's love or
admiration even though you deserve to be put on a pedestal and showered with
accolades for your work on behalf of now-defunct software companies.
Don
Trina Borras wrote:
> P.S. Don, I didn't get a chance to write then, but I was completely
> in sympathy with your position on those games from ... was it Access?
> the other day. If so, was Countdown one of the games you were
> alluding to because I couldn't find the beginning of that thread.
> Maybe you could add whatever they were to that list of games we could
> make if others are so inclined to participate in hopes of finding them
> online or by catalog. ;)
It was so long ago that I'd forgotten it and had to really think about
what you were talking about. Hehehe! It was Apogee, and remarkably, I
think I found a CD with the program, an add-on pack, on it. Oddly, it
includes the original game, and I'm almost certain this combination was
never commercially available from the publisher. This makes me think
that it might be a pirated version which brings me back to the question,
"is it my responsibility to ascertain if it's a legit copy before I buy
it?" Now, I won't sleep nights agonizing over it! ;-)
Don
Trina Borras wrote:
> Don was
> merely throwing the spotlight on what FD had just done. And what he'd
> not just done was evidence that he took the whole thing very
> seriously. Well, that is my theory of the dynamics at work there
> anyway. (If I've projected onto you, inaptly, what your own words
> would have meant had I written them, Don, please correct me.)
You're exactly right, and I just explained that in another post.
Steve Young
Fortran Dragon wrote in message ...
>My glass typewriter shows Sam Jeffreys typing...
>[Snip]
>> I totally agree with Trina on this. It irritates me to read the
comments
>> in this thread, from Game Dame, Disoriented Dragon and others.
>> To these people: How many obscure '80s games have you actually tried
to
>> get hold of?
>
> Hundreds. I buy and resell old games.
I presume then you plan to give a percentage of each sale to the writers
and owners of the copyrighted material as you are such a defender of
these peoples rights. I think 40% is about what the companies make for
each sale on the market. I would make sure that they get in the next
post if I was you, and yes better not forget all those back sales over
the years.
What was that. Can't send any money because most of the companies don't
exist anymore or whose copyright has been took over by someone else?.
You will be destitute after paying back that amount? This doesn't count
as it isn't the same as downloading software? Will, the copyright holder
is losing out either way so whats the difference and as you keep telling
us that's no excuse.
> I do state that piracy is illegal and the support of it is short
>sighted. Just look at UCITA in the US as a major consequence of
piracy.
>Don't like onerous shrinkwrap licences? UCITA makes them *law*.
It is no more short sighted than people dealing with old games. The
people who own the copyright or the industry in general is no better of
either way, and neither is technically legal, but one is seen more
morally right than the other by certain people. That's all.
Steve
Steve Young
Fortran Dragon wrote in message ...
>[Snip]
>> That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would
stop
>> hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
>> say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
>> cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
>> they are afraid to use their own.
>
As far as I know that is his name, and from past experience is a person
who is not afraid to speak out and state controversial views under his
name. I could be wrong, and this name may be false and he has other
pseudonyms, but I have no reason to doubt him.
> Also, if I set up my newsreader to display Adam Smith instead of
>Fortran Dragon, just how the hell are you going to know if that is a
>pseudonym or not? One hint: You're not.
That's I'm afraid very true, and is one of the things I don't like about
the internet. There has been a lot of debate about this issue in the
media recently in the UK, and I wouldn't be surprised in other countries
around the world too. Many people have been becoming worried how people
(particularly children) are getting closely attached through chat rooms,
E-Mails etc with no idea at all about the people they are conversing
with and which have led sometimes to criminal and illigal acts.
(Paedophiles, Porn Merchants, Financial villians spring to mind)
I have got nothing about using pseudonyms in general, but what annoys
me is when people use one to make controversial views known, rather than
use the regular name or nickname because they haven't the guts to use
it. And could it be that is what you are doing, and are hiding behind a
well known person on this group, because to tell you the truth I haven't
heard anything from you or that other one Game Dame until fairly
recently, and then it is always about piracy. You are not an employee of
one of these game companies are you? I'm not kidding, are you one.
Steve Young
Nobody wrote in message <37b5a...@news.pacifier.com>...
>
>Steve Young <steve...@eclipse.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:93463956...@ns2.saturn.ispc.net...
>> That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would
stop
>> hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
>> say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
>> cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
>> they are afraid to use their own.
>I write anonymously not out of cowardice but instead for unwanted email
>marketing avoidance. I think a lot of the pseudonyminous (is that a
real
>word? if not, it should be) posters do so for the same reason. Let's
switch
>this argument over to a discussion of the real a-holes of the
Internet--the
>email spammers! No, wait, no argument would be possible there--everyone
>agrees on that! Not only that, but two-thirds of those are trying to
sell
>pornography, which I find offensive because I have young children;
also,
>young children post on these games newsgroups and are themselves direct
>targets of such odious marketing efforts. Oh, the evil of it all!
Anyway,
>when I first started reading newsgroups, I used my real name/email
address
>*once* and got a barrage that took about six months to die out, so I
learned
>a valuable lesson.
I agree with you about spamming, a bunch of pests at best and
evil at worst, and can understand your worries about your children
seeing this stuff, but you don't need to hide your name to avoid this,
and could easily put it on your letters like many people do. Trouble is
I have seen you post here for a long time and it was only recently that
I even knew you were female(I think that's correct) when you said
something in one post to someone, whereas I had always thought you as a
male.
And as I have just said in a previous post to Fortron Dragon(male or
female? who knows) there is a bigger danger on the internet due to this
anonymity than anything that might be seen on the net. Who knows who you
might be(or more importantly your children) striking up conservations
with and giving personal information too. That nice lady friend you
might be talking to could be Jack the Ripper or Saddam Hussein for all
you know and little Suzy your childs friend could be a murderous
paedophile, so I do feel it is important if anything to bring at least a
little honesty into these groups if only by who we are.
Steve
Don
MdmeDis wrote:
> <shrug> The point, which apparently has eluded you, was rather than the
> round of wallet pulling you suggest in response to being told where the
> items *are* commercially available was "Why bother, when its free".
Why I said what I said has been covered in previous posts, but I'll add
that if you can't recognize parody and sarcasm when you see them, we'll
start adding footnotes to our posts for you.
> Don has stated he violates copyright on occasion.
>
> Can you blame me for thinking he was having a blinding flash of honesty?
Ok. When did I state that? I challenge you right now to find one post
where I stated that I have ever done anything to violate copyrights.
It's one thing to take someone's quote and use it out of context, but
it's quite a different matter to say that a person said something which
they never did say!
BTW, all my posts to this newsgroup are available on deja.com if you
care to really do a thorough search.
KSS
> In article <7p5g08$b32$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>,
> tbo...@mindspring.com says...
>
>
> > What I did say was that once, buying an oldie brand new, one of the
> > diskettes was corrupted, and that I'd had to resort to an abandonware
> > copy to fill in the files that I could only assume were on disk 4,
> > the disk that didn't work.
>
> Then according to all we've been through above, you should have returned
> it and got your money back. But you seem to think it is some
> justification for you to indulge in piracy - so, no matter where I tell
> you stuff is, your actions indicate you are going to do it anyway, so
> I'm not going to waste my time. Get it?
Actually I think that, since she had paid for the game, Trina had 2 morally
acceptable choices :
either return the game and get her money back
or keep the game and "fix" it (using abandonware)
and since she wanted the game, she chose the 2nd option...
KSS
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> Dragon - not you (Fortran Dragon).
I think you covered me in the "and others" part of your
statements.
--
Fortran Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
Hidalgo Trading Company: <http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/>
rgcud FAQ: <http://home.earthlink.net/~fortran/faq/rgcudfaq.html>
MdmeDis
Then I offer my humble apologies for taking you seriously. I won't let
it happen again. ;)
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
DisDefinitions: That's not what I meant = I wish I hadn't
said that.
Don
Noman wrote:
> a) I 'd rather download an abandonware title, than
> to buy it used from someone (unless, I really need the
> manual) If my money is not going to (and can not go
> to) the publishers and developers in any shape or
> form, than I don't see any difference between buying
> used titles and downloading abandonware, except that
> one person is charging me for the software and the other
> isn't. Btw, abandonware is not warez.
I couldn't agree more with what you have said. Legality aside, why
should people be making big profits from buying and selling used games?
Who does that benefit besides the person selling them? It doesn't
really benefit me to pay $10.00 plus shipping for a game they snagged
for 99 cents in some clearance bin or at a garage sale if the game is
readily available for free on the net.
I've been so far behind on reading this group that I only today realized
that Fortran is in the business of buying and selling used games. That
would certainly explain to me why he is so adamantly against abandonware
since it would take too much business away from him.
Don
Steve Young wrote:
> I agree with you Noman, and I would also add that if you read the small
> print on most packages, it forbids the selling of such software to a
> third party. So, this is as much a so called crime against society as
> downloading it from these sites, in which case you would think these
> hollier than thou disciples would be cracking down on this instead of
> condoning it.
Could you please give some examples of this. When this came up in
another thread, I was asked to give examples of licensing agreements
which forbid resale, and I have no way of even checking it since I don't
keep the boxes or other packaging that games come in and don't have time
to load every CD to search for an online version of it.
Actually, I'm not the one who stated this in the other thread. I
believe you and Siberio were the ones who mentioned it, but I was the
one questioned about it when I cited what you had said. I do believe
that I too have seen this in some agreements, but I certainly don't make
it a habit of remembering what the agreements to specific programs say.
> That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would stop
> hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
> say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
> cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
> they are afraid to use their own.
Others have mentioned this, but I just wanted to add my reasons for
removing my surname and ISP from my address. Unlike you, I have an
unusual enough last name that it is easy to track me down with the
knowledge of what state my ISP is in, and when I first came on the net,
some crazy lady did exactly that. To compound matters, the only phone
number listed in my name is at my parent's house and not at mine.
Therefore, my parents were getting weird phone calls in the middle of
the night, and I quickly removed the information from my address.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> Oh, can't you see that I was just being facetious and mockingly
> reiterating FD's condescending tone?
Ah. So when you do it, it is being facetious and mocking, but
anyone else does it, why they are just be condescending. Quite the
little self-serving double standard there.
[Snip]
> The sites I'm familiar with have a notice
> to the copyright holders that they will remove any games upon their
> request.
None honor those requests, though.
> Obviously, the copyright holders don't care that their game is
> being freely distributed, or they'd make that request.
[Snip]
The point being that you are ignoring the fact that that these
sites need to first obtain permission from the copyright holders to post
the games.
Your example is like posting all of the works of Stephen King and
then saying you'll remove them if he asks you pretty please with sugar
on it. It doesn't work that way.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> If Activision had any real interest in making money off of it, they
> would
> have rereleased it on the Masterpieces of Infocom CD.
The license for Shogun had reverted to the Clavell estate.
> The fact that the
> estate of James Clavell would want money for that and that's why they chose
> not to do it
[Snip]
Fact or supposition?
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> abandonware along with the WaR3z D00dZ, then I am afraid,
> I completely disagree.
They are the same thing.
[Snip]
> There we go trying to equate physical property theft with intellectual
> property theft. <sigh>
Except in that example the house wasn't stolen...
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> mmmm.. no you can't.
Care to prove that point?
[Snip]
> Thin ice, dude (or dudette). Very thin ice.
Nope. Your email address is a pseudonym. No matter how
legitimate you might think your reasons are, you've altered your email
address to be bogus.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> PS: Had you understood my first mail (instead of translating it
> with your own pre conceived views), and replied with
> something even remotely relevant to it, I might have kept
> the discussion on topic.
In other words you can't back up a single thing you said. All
you can do insult make kindergarten insults.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> and owners of the copyrighted material as you are such a defender of
> these peoples rights. I think 40% is about what the companies make for
> each sale on the market. I would make sure that they get in the next
> post if I was you, and yes better not forget all those back sales over
> the years.
Nice little attempt at sidetracking the argument, but it didn't
work. I'm sure that you know as well as I that the law allows for the
resale of items. If it forbade resale there would not be any retailers,
just wholesellers.
Fortran Dragon
> And when you did you misrepresented Don. Now you are
> misrepresenting me, don't you have enough intellectual ammo to work
> with without having to resort to misstating the views of those with
> whom you disagree?
Trinie, you willfully misrepresented my views, but I don't see you
coming clean about that or having the grace to apologize. Perhaps you
shouldn't accuse others of using your tactics, hypocrite.
[Snip]
> What I did say was that I found it risky to buy games from *used
> games online stores* because *they* can't guarantee the condition of
> all the software they sell and when you're dealing w/old diskettes no
> matter even that they be pristine in the sense that no one has used
> them you've got a 50% chance (this is my experience over the years
> buying used old games) one or more disks will be corrupt.
Heh. In my two decades experience of dealing with old games, I've
only had about 1 in a 100 go bad. (You are more apt to have a 3.5" DSHD
go bad than an old 5.25" DSDD do sour.) Then again, I make sure I clean
my disk drives on occasion and I also try the disks out on several
different computers.
[Snip]
> Other than that, I said I'd downloaded and played Zeliard a bit
> before I was lucky enough to land a *real* (= in my possession) copy
> through the ugtz.
In other words, you didn't have the self-discipline to wait for a
legal copy. You had to steal it first.
> I also stated that I'd downloaded a copy of Elvira
> 1 which I shelved as soon as I heard that Adventure Soft was planning
> on reissuing that classic along with a couple of others to inaugurate
> their new budget reissue series.
Oh, so Elvira 1 really wasn't abandonware. Gee Trinie, you just
shot the hell out of your own argument. Not surprising that since you
seem to have a great difficulty understanding what this discussion is
all about.
[Snip]
> If this is the price one has to pay for making utterances in the
> presence of one of your order, having to go back and correct the
> record and say the same thing all over again because of your blatant
> and oh so knowing mangling of statements to reflect other than
> reality,
Just like what you did to me, Trinie?
> statements which get farther from the truth as they continue
> to be recycled and further away from the source document, for that is
> the nature of rumor, then no wonder you don't have more people signing
> up for your colloqies and that you don't use your real name.
A free hint, Trinie. One run on sentence does not make a
paragraph.
> Do watch it with your word choice from now on. I hardly think
> your pride or whatever's motivating you is worth risking being
> accused of libel for.
<snicker>
[Snip]
> Anyway, there is a *class* of use-
> netter who employ them not to protect themselves from spam, or for
> fun, or to ward off unwanted e-mail, and various assorted other legit
> reasons (unless secondarily), but to *hide behind*.
And we know what class you are Trinie: Working class.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> who is not afraid to speak out and state controversial views under his
> name. I could be wrong, and this name may be false and he has other
> pseudonyms, but I have no reason to doubt him.
Fair enough. In my case I've seem a number of people use noman
(that is, No Man) as a little people on being anonymous.
[Snip]
> I have got nothing about using pseudonyms in general, but what annoys
> me is when people use one to make controversial views known, rather than
> use the regular name or nickname because they haven't the guts to use
> it.
Well, if you bothered to look me up in DejaNews you would find my
real name. Since these are _entertainment_ newsgroups, I use a
pseudonym. In other newsgroups I use my real name (mainly the
*.marketplace newsgroups).
So, basically, any claim that I am trying to hide because of my
views is so much hot air. Heck, I don't even use a spam-block.
> And could it be that is what you are doing, and are hiding behind a
> well known person on this group, because to tell you the truth I haven't
> heard anything from you or that other one Game Dame until fairly
> recently, and then it is always about piracy.
<evil grin> I have a fondness and a weakness for pirates. I like
to make their lives as miserable as what they've done to the rest of us
in the US by their actions (UCITA, for example). I get tired of the
pirates' little-spoiled-brat-whining-for-more-candy-in-the-candy-store
mentality.
> You are not an employee of
> one of these game companies are you? I'm not kidding, are you one.
No, I don't work for a game company, nor have I ever done so. I
am, as I stated before, a programmer who would like to see my own rights
under copyright law protected. And who has enough grounding in law and
the philosophical underpinnings of the law to know that in order to
protect my own rights I need to respect the rights of others.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> This argument has popped up continuously since I've
> been reading this group, and it peters out only when the two (it always gets
> down to two) arguers finally get tired of typing the same thing over and
> over again. Then it rears its ugly head again next time somebody uses any
> kind of word with a "z" at the end.
I'd suggest investing in a decent newsreader that supports a
killfile. Otherwise your time on Usenet is going to be miserable
because people *are* going to discuss things you don't like.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> know the facts, mister.
Then don't make claims about things before you make a modest
effort to determine what the facts really are.
[Snip]
> Whatever. In your eyes maybe, but not in mine. I stand by my statement
> that Shogun is hard to find.
You would still be wrong.
> Just because it is available now on ebay
> doesn't mean it is readily available. And that's just one example, and yes
> I could list a lot of others. Please point me to where I can buy copies
> of Magnetic Scrolls' The Pawn and Knight Orc, pretty please?
Several copies of The Pawn is at
<http://members.aol.com/SWMoreTP/Collectiblesoftware.html>. I'm sure
the other one is equally easy to find.
> And anyway that's beside the point. Buying a game USED is not helping
> the original authors anymore than downloading from abandonware does.
It is just that the former is legal while the latter is not.
Fortran Dragon
[Snip]
> that Fortran is in the business of buying and selling used games. That
> would certainly explain to me why he is so adamantly against abandonware
> since it would take too much business away from him.
Except that I resell the games at *no* markup. That's right, I
*don't* *make* *a* *profit*. That's shoots your snotty comment down
quite thoroughly. <evil grin>
Don
MdmeDis wrote:
>
> In article <7p5g08$b32$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net>,
> tbo...@mindspring.com says...
>
> > mdm...@earthlink.net (MdmeDis) wrote:
>
> > >If its on a wareZ site, it ain't difficult to find. Borras indicated
> > >that paying for used games was stupid, so why should I waste time
> > >looking 'em up for her?
> >
> > I neither said nor "indicated" any such thing.
>
> <Quote>
>
> .. fortunately, I found an abandonware copy of it and it had the
> files missing from disk four, else I'd have respectably paid for it
> and be sitting here -- self-righteously -- with a game I couldn't
> play, but out of pocket a bit, and isn't *that* what a lot of this
> comes down to -- that some money exchange hands, no matter who the
> parties may be?
You still don't get it! She BOUGHT the f*cking game! And she NEVER
said anything about paying for used games being stupid! You have become
the all-time champion at misquoting and misinterpreting what people
say.
Don
Bob Roseman wrote:
> Hi Steve.
>
> It's been said that 'the pen is mightier than the sword'. Since we are
> using electronic media, maybe shove a keyboard up his ............
Thanks for the best laugh I've had in a long time. Now, I need some
paper towels to clean up the tea I sprayed all over my monitor.
MdmeDis
>
>
> MdmeDis wrote:
>
> > <shrug> The point, which apparently has eluded you, was rather than the
> > round of wallet pulling you suggest in response to being told where the
> > items *are* commercially available was "Why bother, when its free".
>
> Why I said what I said has been covered in previous posts, but I'll add
> that if you can't recognize parody and sarcasm when you see them, we'll
> start adding footnotes to our posts for you.
In your shoes I wouldn't -it will actually nail you down to what you
said and you won't have a lot of wiggle room later - but suit yourself.
> > Don has stated he violates copyright on occasion.
> >
> > Can you blame me for thinking he was having a blinding flash of honesty?
>
> Ok. When did I state that? I challenge you right now to find one post
> where I stated that I have ever done anything to violate copyrights.
<Direct Quote, Full context below>
" but when the publisher (not the author, artist, or developer) decides
to just stop offering the product, I don't feel a bit guilty about
obtaining it through "illegal" means".
</Direct Quote>
Here you say *don't* feel guilty. Again, I have taken you literally, at
your word. Not "wouldn't feel guilty if I should ever do it" but "don't
feel a bit guilty about obtaining it through "illegal" means"
<Direct Quote>
"If I find any of these programs on the net, I won't have any qualms
about downloading them."
</Direct Quote>
And here you state that in future you intend to download them without
qualms....
>> Forum: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure
>> Thread: Old Games Nostalgia
>> Message 238 of 288
Subject:
Re: Old Games Nostalgia
Date:
1999/07/18
Author:
Don <D...@no.spam>
Posting History
<<Note: I snipped Fortran's comments>>
I completely agree with you about what abandonwarez are, and I don't
condone the piracy of any legally available games, music, literary
works, etc. In fact, I argue with people all the time about downloading
and sharing MP3s, but when the publisher (not the author, artist, or
developer) decides to just stop offering the product, I don't feel a bit
guilty about obtaining it through "illegal" means.
I'm one of a group of many people who have been trying to get some
programs from Apogee Software for about 3 years now. They won't sell
the programs or offer them as freeware, and they won't even answer our
requests/questions about them. If I find any of these programs on the
net, I won't have any qualms about downloading them.
***************************
> It's one thing to take someone's quote and use it out of context,
I didn't. I took it at face value. In direct response to Fortran's
comment about where to find a game, you *directly* responded "Heehee.
Why bother when you can get it for free all over the net?" What is out
of context there?
Above you say you agree its illegal; you don't condone it but you do it.
but
> it's quite a different matter to say that a person said something which
> they never did say!
But you did! Although I won't be remotely surprised to be told that
wasn't what you meant, or that it is another attempt at the
scintillating wit for which you are so renowned - and to be perfectly
honest, in reality you do have. But honesty doesn't have much going for
it these days it seems.:(
> BTW, all my posts to this newsgroup are available on deja.com if you
> care to really do a thorough search.
Didn't take but a couple of minutes to find...
Bob Roseman
Don = 14,279 points
Fortran Dragon =14,282 points
Fourth quarter, two minute warning.......
I thought he had you there, Fortran.
MdmeDis
>
> It was so long ago that I'd forgotten it and had to really think about
> what you were talking about. Hehehe! It was Apogee, and remarkably, I
> think I found a CD with the program, an add-on pack, on it. Oddly, it
> includes the original game, and I'm almost certain this combination was
> never commercially available from the publisher. This makes me think
> that it might be a pirated version which brings me back to the question,
> "is it my responsibility to ascertain if it's a legit copy before I buy
> it?" Now, I won't sleep nights agonizing over it! ;-)
Oh, you won't have to do that - you also said you don't and won't feel
guilty about it.....
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
DisDefinitions: You're twisting my words = I just said
something incredibly dumb and I'm trying to wriggle out of it
MdmeDis
In article <37B6EE0B...@zzzhome.yycom>, no...@zzzhome.yycom
says...
>
> MdmeDis wrote:
> > > > > except that
> > > > > one person is charging me for the (used) software and the other
> > > > > isn't.
> > > >
> > > > Mmmm. The same can be said about most stolen goods also.
> > >
> > > mmmm.. no you can't.
> >
> > See above, sans namecalling.
>
> okay, let me add it then,
>
> mmmm.. no idiot, you can't.
Sure you can "The only difference between this used book I stole and the
one over there I bought from the used bookstore is that a person charged
me for one, and not the other" See? Easy.
> You are wrong and a silly poo-poo, but I don't want to talk
> about it, to a person who doesn't seem to understand anything
> at all (aka, idiot)
Oh bullshit! You haven't even tried.
> For your sake, this is my last post in this thread (please
> bless this parting line, with your translation, I'd like to
> read that)
You were the inspiration for the line of DisDefinitions - but not the
source. That mainly is my own screw-ups over the years. But I'll
copyright this sig. for you. I will be using it as a sig, so if you
don't want your name attached, say so and I won't.
Here are some alternatives if you prefer:
This is my last post in this thread = I've run out of insults
This is my last post in this thread = I'll be posting under a phony name
from deja-com in future.
This is my last post in this thread = but there are many, many others
and I plan on making your life a living hell from here on out.
> PS: Had you understood my first mail (instead of translating it
> with your own pre conceived views),
I understood. Understanding isn't synonymous with concurrence.
> and replied with
> something even remotely relevant to it, I might have kept
> the discussion on topic.
As I said, I attempted humour, but mine and that of this group is at
variance. :/
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
This is positively my last post in this thread = I've run out of names
to call you (tm)Noman Ahmed
MdmeDis
>
>
> Steve Young wrote:
>
> > I agree with you Noman, and I would also add that if you read the small
> > print on most packages, it forbids the selling of such software to a
> > third party. So, this is as much a so called crime against society as
> > downloading it from these sites, in which case you would think these
> > hollier than thou disciples would be cracking down on this instead of
> > condoning it.
Who's condoning it?
> Could you please give some examples of this.
Infocom's Suspended (face-mask version) says: .......The distribution
and sale of this product are intended for the use of the original
purchaser only ............ Copying, duplicating, selling or otherwise
distributing this product is a violation of the law.
I've included the pertinent bits only - which of course, you may argue
are taken out of context.... but there you are. If that is interpreted
literally, it means *noone* can sell it or even give it away - including
retailers, so unless Infocom sold these directly, there have to be other
implied (legal) meanings to it.
> When this came up in
> another thread, I was asked to give examples of licensing agreements
> which forbid resale, and I have no way of even checking it since I don't
> keep the boxes or other packaging that games come in and don't have time
> to load every CD to search for an online version of it.
We have probably hundreds. Is it really important? I could do a bit of
research for you.
>
> Actually, I'm not the one who stated this in the other thread. I
> believe you and Siberio were the ones who mentioned it, but I was the
> one questioned about it when I cited what you had said. I do believe
> that I too have seen this in some agreements, but I certainly don't make
> it a habit of remembering what the agreements to specific programs say.
Some do, some don't - but copyright itself has things that are not
stated in the small print on the boxes - things like it CAN be
distributed, sold copied etc. by the licensees or agents of the
copyright holder (That is my understanding, and I could be wrong)
In addition, some copyright provisions are not legal - because they
violate other state or countries laws....
>
> > That's true, unlike MdmeDis who ever they are. I wish people would stop
> > hiding behind their pseudonyms when they have something to
> > say(especially controversial) as to my mind they are a bunch of old
> > cowards and are not worth listening to if they use another name when
> > they are afraid to use their own.
>
> Others have mentioned this, but I just wanted to add my reasons for
> removing my surname and ISP from my address. Unlike you, I have an
> unusual enough last name that it is easy to track me down with the
> knowledge of what state my ISP is in, and when I first came on the net,
> some crazy lady did exactly that. To compound matters, the only phone
> number listed in my name is at my parent's house and not at mine.
> Therefore, my parents were getting weird phone calls in the middle of
> the night, and I quickly removed the information from my address.
Which is along the lines of what happened to me... In some ways, its
almost comforting to know it ain't only women. I became so paranoid I
have not renewed my drivers licence in the state to which I have moved,
and the phone is not listed in my name.
--
Disoriented Dragon
-==(UDIC)==-
DisDefinitions: The facts of the matter are known to
everyone = ~ except me.