Is Beek trying to lay claim to others MudOS work?
Edison
MudOS:
In addition, the entire package is copyright 1995 by Tim Hollebeek.
In another thread here it was suggested that this is an inappropriate
attempt to claim ownership of others work. Note that there are MANY
contributors to MudOS. This does not seem to be in a good community
spirit. What do you think should be done?
-Ed.
John Viega
as you were?
He was clearly trying to say the same thing you were... "I've made
sweeping changes, and there is code of mine all over the place I want
to protect." He didn't know how to say it 12 years ago, nor did you 12
hours ago.
Please stop being a sensationalistic asshole shitting over people just
because they weren't happy that you usurped the MudOS name without
bothering to try to make contact with anybody about it. I can assure
you that, now that you've changed the name, not a single person on this
earth wishes you anything but luck with MUM.
Edison
> Yes, it was inappropriate, just like yours was. Did you ever stop to
> think that maybe Beek was just as ignorant of copyright law 12 years
> ago as you were 12 hours ago? I'm sure whoever makes the next official
Yes. My error was in making the assumption that he knew what he was doing
and following his example.
> release will fix it, and Beek will give his consent.
Good. I hope he does.
> Please stop being a sensationalistic asshole, shitting on people just
> because they didn't like you usurping the name "MudOS" without ever
> trying to contact anyone about it. If you don't want to believe you
Please quit posting falsehoods. This is a disservice. Attempts were made
to contact people.
> were wrong, that's fine. I don't think anybody cares anymore, now that
> you've changed the name.
Then why are you still posting?
-Ed.
John Viega
Edison wrote:
> > Please stop being a sensationalistic asshole, shitting on people just
> > because they didn't like you usurping the name "MudOS" without ever
> > trying to contact anyone about it. If you don't want to believe you
>
> Please quit posting falsehoods. This is a disservice. Attempts were made
> to contact people.
About you running with the name to MudOS?? What exactly did you do?
Did you mail Marius about it, who has his email address posted on the
mudos.org web site? Did you mail the MudOS list? Did you ever mail
anyone who'd previously been involved? Did you contact people who were
on the mailing list, asking "what's up with the community these days"?
Did you look up the mudos.org DNS registration info and try to send
mail to that address? If you did something, you hadn't made it clear
before. And, it clearly wasn't enough, anyway.
>
> > were wrong, that's fine. I don't think anybody cares anymore, now that
> > you've changed the name.
>
> Then why are you still posting?
Nobody cares that you're distributing your own mud code base. I care
that you're being an insulting, self-righteous asshole to people who
never wanted to do anything other than a service to the community.
John Viega
you're an asshole to me, nor do I think your response to me was overly
assholish, anyway.
Good luck!
Edison
> Ever stop to think that he might have been as ignorant of copyright law
> as you were?
>
> He was clearly trying to say the same thing you were... "I've made
> sweeping changes, and there is code of mine all over the place I want
> to protect." He didn't know how to say it 12 years ago, nor did you 12
> hours ago.
I've just about given up on trying to correct the falsehoods you are
perpetrating. This is taking up way too much of my time.
Regardless, I feel I have to set the record straight. It wasn't 12 hours
ago, it was nearly 3 months ago. Of course, you'll want evidence of that,
so refer to the thread titled "Re: CODE_RELEASE: [server] MudOS 1.0" which
I started on March 15. The fact that it took your camp nearly 3 months to
even notice my release underscores how dead the main MudOS branch is.
Frankly, I didn't expect you to ever notice. I was quite amused when your
camp began personally attacking me 3 months later.
> Please stop being a sensationalistic asshole shitting over people
> just because they weren't happy that you usurped the MudOS name without
> bothering to try to make contact with anybody about it. I can assure
> you that, now that you've changed the name, not a single person on this
> earth wishes you anything but luck with MUM.
Much like the other interpretations from your camp, this is the most
negative one possible. I did not feel I had changed enough of MudOS to
justify changing the name. I felt this would be a discredit to the people
who worked on MudOS. (Of course at this point I'm just repeating
myself.)
Now the fact that you keep calling me an asshole only confirms my
suspicion that had I changed the name, your camp would have attacked me
for changing it.
-Ed.
John Viega
Edison wrote:
>
> I've just about given up on trying to correct the falsehoods you are
> perpetrating. This is taking up way too much of my time.
It's no falsehood. Posting to r.g.m.lp isn't "making an effort to try
to contact the MudOS crowd". They have their own community, it's
defined by the web page and the mailing list, and NOT this newsgroup.
You knew about them, so I think this is absolutely 0 defense. You
made NO real effort.
I know very few people who still read news (even though many of them
still hang out on muds), and I only happened upon all this crap because
I needed to look at some content in some other group, and thought,
"gee, I wonder if there's any activity on r.g.m.lp". I didn't even
look back 3 months, I saw the TMI-3 thread, which mentioned MudOS.
Then, when I alerted Marius, he searched google groups, and turned up
the thread.
>
> Regardless, I feel I have to set the record straight. It wasn't 12 hours
> ago, it was nearly 3 months ago. Of course, you'll want evidence of that,
> so refer to the thread titled "Re: CODE_RELEASE: [server] MudOS 1.0" which
> I started on March 15. The fact that it took your camp nearly 3 months to
> even notice my release underscores how dead the main MudOS branch is.
> Frankly, I didn't expect you to ever notice. I was quite amused when your
> camp began personally attacking me 3 months later.
"You didn't expect us to notice", because you weren't trying to contact
that community. And you don't see why this is perceived as assholic?
Particularly when you keep arguing about something, insulting people
by, for example, claiming they need history lessons when they don't,
etc?
> > > Please stop being a sensationalistic asshole shitting over people
> > just because they weren't happy that you usurped the MudOS name without
> > bothering to try to make contact with anybody about it. I can assure
> > you that, now that you've changed the name, not a single person on this
> > earth wishes you anything but luck with MUM.
>
> Much like the other interpretations from your camp, this is the most
> negative one possible. I did not feel I had changed enough of MudOS to
> justify changing the name. I felt this would be a discredit to the people
> who worked on MudOS. (Of course at this point I'm just repeating
> myself.)
Then you should have been distributing patches, or appended to the name
some indication that it was unofficial mods. It is and will always be
silly to steal the name of some other project without going and getting
permission. Even with the MudOS / LPC deal, there was no cry to call
the package "LPC", it was to call it "MudOS LPC", more or less.
> Now the fact that you keep calling me an asshole only confirms my
> suspicion that had I changed the name, your camp would have attacked me
> for changing it.
No, it's because you keep acting indignant when you were pretty much
clearly wrong. And you keep swinging insults at people like Beek that
seem completely unmerited... just lashing out because you're pissed off
about being called out.
It's you who are taking the most negative view of things if you think
we would care about redistributions under other names. See, for
example,
http://mailman.list.org/pipermail/mudos/2000-December/000207.html
Which was the first hit on "mudos driver fork". I don't know if that
guy ever released a fork or not, but nobody cares!
Edison
<omitted>
> Did you mail Marius about it, who has his email address posted on the
I had e-mailed Marius in the past a few times. I never received a reply.
As his acknowledged in his initial post, he generally ignores any e-mail
with "MudOS" in the subject, even if it concerns the name.
> mudos.org web site? Did you mail the MudOS list? Did you ever mail
As I explained in another thread/venue to which you subscribe, I tried to
join and e-mail the MudOS list. All I ever received were failures, and
until the other day I never received a single e-mail from the list. I
didn't know I had to Cc that strange address in addition to e-mailing the
list. Also, there was simply no traffic on the list.
> anyone who'd previously been involved? Did you contact people who were
> on the mailing list, asking "what's up with the community these days"?
No. I didn't think of that.
> Did you look up the mudos.org DNS registration info and try to send
> mail to that address? If you did something, you hadn't made it clear
Yes. That occurred to me. I tried that and it either bounced or I did
not receive a reply. That was long enough ago I don't remember the
details.
-Ed.
John Viega
Edison wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 11:19:23 -0700, John Viega wrote:
>
> <omitted>
>
> > Did you mail Marius about it, who has his email address posted on the
>
> I had e-mailed Marius in the past a few times. I never received a reply.
> As his acknowledged in his initial post, he generally ignores any e-mail
> with "MudOS" in the subject, even if it concerns the name.
But you didn't mail him on this topic (you've said this was on a
different topic), nor did you know that he probably would have ignored
it until he just told you a couple of days ago.
> Yes. That occurred to me. I tried that and it either bounced or I did
> not receive a reply. That was long enough ago I don't remember the
> details.
A bounce makes no sense. The not receiving a reply seems reasonable.
I think you could have done a lot more, and you should have anticipated
this issue, because there's no real precidence for taking over the name
without getting some sort of endorsement, and without changing the name
at all. Going back to the MudOS thing, if MudOS continued calling
itself "LPC" without any differentiation in the title, it would have
been a huge issue, due to the inevitible confusion. This is the path
you were leading people down... it's a big deal, and I think everybody
would just like you to see that and accept it.
If you were to stop being so indignant about the whole thing, I for one
would hardly care that you didn't do enough in the first place, since
you HAVE changed your driver's name.
Edison
>> I've just about given up on trying to correct the falsehoods you are
>> perpetrating. This is taking up way too much of my time.
> It's no falsehood. Posting to r.g.m.lp isn't "making an effort to try
> to contact the MudOS crowd". They have their own community, it's
> defined by the web page and the mailing list, and NOT this newsgroup.
> You knew about them, so I think this is absolutely 0 defense. You
> made NO real effort.
It IS a falsehood, but we're beating a dead horse. Please see the other
thread. I had tried most of the things you suggested I should have.
>> Regardless, I feel I have to set the record straight. It wasn't 12 hours
>> ago, it was nearly 3 months ago. Of course, you'll want evidence of that,
>> so refer to the thread titled "Re: CODE_RELEASE: [server] MudOS 1.0" which
>> I started on March 15. The fact that it took your camp nearly 3 months to
>> even notice my release underscores how dead the main MudOS branch is.
>> Frankly, I didn't expect you to ever notice. I was quite amused when your
>> camp began personally attacking me 3 months later.
> "You didn't expect us to notice", because you weren't trying to contact
> that community. And you don't see why this is perceived as assholic?
> Particularly when you keep arguing about something, insulting people by,
> for example, claiming they need history lessons when they don't, etc?
I didn't expect you to notice because I tried to contact people with no
success and I saw zero traffic on the list to which I was unknowingly
subscribed (because the subscription attempt itself seemed to fail.)
> Then you should have been distributing patches, or appended to the name
> some indication that it was unofficial mods. It is and will always be
> silly to steal the name of some other project without going and getting
Your posts are bordering on defamation. Please cease and desist.
>> Now the fact that you keep calling me an asshole only confirms my
>> suspicion that had I changed the name, your camp would have attacked me
>> for changing it.
> No, it's because you keep acting indignant when you were pretty much
> clearly wrong. And you keep swinging insults at people like Beek that
> seem completely unmerited... just lashing out because you're pissed off
> about being called out.
I believe the indignation mostly comes from your camp. Start with Marius
initial post. Read from there. As for the Beek thread, I replied in a
very restrained fashion to his very vitriolic attack of me. There are
many more things that I could say, but are beneath my dignity.
<omitted>
-Ed.
John Viega
Edison wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 13:06:53 -0700, John Viega wrote:
>
> >> I've just about given up on trying to correct the falsehoods you are
> >> perpetrating. This is taking up way too much of my time.
> > It's no falsehood. Posting to r.g.m.lp isn't "making an effort to try
> > to contact the MudOS crowd". They have their own community, it's
> > defined by the web page and the mailing list, and NOT this newsgroup.
> > You knew about them, so I think this is absolutely 0 defense. You
> > made NO real effort.
>
> It IS a falsehood, but we're beating a dead horse. Please see the other
> thread. I had tried most of the things you suggested I should have.
You clearly feel it is, but a lot of people clearly see it otherwise.
You had a hard time contacting people in a different context at a
different time. That's different from making an effort in this
context.
> I didn't expect you to notice because I tried to contact people with no
> success and I saw zero traffic on the list to which I was unknowingly
> subscribed (because the subscription attempt itself seemed to fail.)
And you didn't try to contact anyone in that community except Marius,
and you didn't even do that in the context of this, and you clearly
didn't think, "after so many years, maybe this is a low traffic mailing
list, ..."
It wasn't enough, or at least, I think most people see it that way,
particularly considering the inevitable potential for market place
confusion in what you've done.
> > Then you should have been distributing patches, or appended to the name
> > some indication that it was unofficial mods. It is and will always be
> > silly to steal the name of some other project without going and getting
>
> Your posts are bordering on defamation. Please cease and desist.
That's absurd. You called your project "MudOS", there's already a
"MudOS" project based on the same original code, and they're not the
same project. That's stealing the name, whether you saw it that way,
or not.
> >> Now the fact that you keep calling me an asshole only confirms my
> >> suspicion that had I changed the name, your camp would have attacked me
> >> for changing it.
> > No, it's because you keep acting indignant when you were pretty much
> > clearly wrong. And you keep swinging insults at people like Beek that
> > seem completely unmerited... just lashing out because you're pissed off
> > about being called out.
>
> I believe the indignation mostly comes from your camp. Start with Marius
> initial post. Read from there. As for the Beek thread, I replied in a
> very restrained fashion to his very vitriolic attack of me. There are
> many more things that I could say, but are beneath my dignity.
I personally think Marius' post was totally reasonable considering the
circumstances. You've done a lot of things that, while I do believe
well-intentioned, still show a total lack of common sense. And while
Beek's post was indeed vitrolic, and your mailing list post was
restrained, you subsequently starting this very thread most certainly
was not. It was petty, at best.
Lars Duening
> I didn't expect you to notice because I tried to contact people with no
> success and I saw zero traffic on the list to which I was unknowingly
> subscribed (because the subscription attempt itself seemed to fail.)
The sad fact is: when you ask people for permission to adopt their works
and they don't answer, then these works aren't yours to adopt.
If it were different, I could have removed the 'no monetary gain' clause
from LDMud's copyright stipulations long time ago (there are certainly
enough requests for it).
--
Lars Duening; lars at bearnip dot com