Statement from Robert MacNeil P.Eng. on Bagpipe Software Copyright Infringement
Robert MacNeil
Infringement
Based on the advice of my intellectual property counsel, I have the
following statement to make.
For the record, I am Robert MacNeil P.Eng. of Robert MacNeil Musicworks,
owner, inventor, designer and developer of Bagpipe Music Writer, Bagpipe
Music Writer Pro and Bagpipe Music Writer Gold, and composer of several
well known bagpipe compositions (e.g. "Jack's Welcome Home", "Murdoch
MacAlister", "The Pile Driver") which have appeared in many published
pipe music collections including my own. I am, and have been recognized
by my peers as, the primary champion in the piping community for the
rights of bagpipe music composers with regard to the protection of their
intellectual property from unauthorized distribution. I must now take
actions to protect my own software intellectual property from
unauthorized distribution.
Doug Wickstrom was formerly involved in the development of Bagpipe Music
Writer Gold. On the evening of May 21, I was informed that he had posted
a program called "Bagpipe Player" on a website and had sent a notice to
this bagpipe newsgroup offering it for free download. Several people
have examined the program and stated on this newsgroup that it is
"Bagpipe Music Writer Gold".
I have examined the program and can confirm that "Bagpipe Player" has
been produced from the source and accessory files for "Bagpipe Music
Writer Gold" with references to "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold" changed to
"Bagpipe Musicworks", "Bagpipe Reader" or "Bagpipe Player" and
references to "Robert MacNeil", "Robert MacNeil Musicworks", and the
names of many famous pipers who contributed advice on some features in
"Bagpipe Music Writer Gold" eliminated. There are also many other
documented, undocumented and unintended items and actions in "Bagpipe
Player" that are exactly the same as "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold", and
consequently it is in infringement of my company's copyright.
"Bagpipe Player" has not been authorized for distribution by Robert
MacNeil Musicworks. Its unauthorized distribution, reproduction or use
by Doug Wickstrom or any other parties is an infringement of the
copyright and intellectual property rights of Robert MacNeil Musicworks.
Appropriate legal steps to terminate this infringement are being taken.
Robert MacNeil P.Eng.
Robert MacNeil Musicworks
toxic piper
recently posted Bagpipe Player software, under Installation,
the 7th bulleted point lists the default directory for
certain installations as "c:bmwgold". Seems to me like an
alteration that was overlooked.
* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful
Bob Smith
Bob
John Brock
and be so freaking stone stupid they think they could get away with it. The
really sad part is Mr. MacNiel is going to be out some serious coin to fight
this. My only hope is everyone sees the ripped-off version as a demo and
purchases BMW if they decide to keep and use it. I hope Mr. Wickstrom goes
down hard.
I work for a software developer too. Nothing like that has happened to
us before. I hope it never does.
John Brock
John Brock
maybe not THAT funny.
JB
mac
just for research of course...
mac
http://home.istar.ca/~dougwick/
still there... open source rools...but...
bill gates philosophy is alive and well...send the boyz round...close him
down...sue him...keep it free...well done...
Bagpiip2
>and be so freaking stone stupid they think they could get away with it.
Yes it does suck! So I hope eveyone stole it before they shut down the website.
Chris Eyre
this is just another case of someone flagrantly ripping off another man's
software. Perhaps that is the case and I may stand corrected. At the moment,
I just don't know for sure. I have a feeling there is a lot more behind this
than most people know and I'm very curious to know what has led up to it. It
certainly doesn't seem to me like the ordinary run-of-the-mill rip-off. I've
never seen anyone ever publically post up a program like this - free of
charge - and include his own name, address and telephone number along with
it. He obviously feels very strongly about what he is doing and is also
obviously not doing it for personal gain. I have heard from several quarters
that it has something to do with Doug having written the code but not having
been properly compensated for his work. Before we go lynching the man on the
first day, does anyone know anything more about what made him do this?
Chris Eyre
Bob Dunsire
I'm a bit worried people might try to downplay the significance of this
situation.
We have facts, in the statements of Robert MacNeil:
<<Doug Wickstrom was formerly involved in the development of Bagpipe Music
Writer Gold. >>
(Something any registered user of BMW Gold already knew - his name is in the
credits of BMW Gold.)
continuing from Robert MacNeil:
<<On the evening of May 21, I was informed that he had posted a program called
"Bagpipe Player" on a website and had sent a notice to this bagpipe newsgroup
offering it for free download
.....big snip ....
There are also many other documented, undocumented and unintended items and
actions in "Bagpipe Player" that are exactly the same as "Bagpipe Music Writer
Gold", and consequently it is in infringement of my company's copyright.
...little snip...
Its unauthorized distribution, reproduction or use by Doug Wickstrom or any
other parties is an infringement of the copyright and intellectual property
rights of Robert MacNeil Musicworks. Appropriate legal steps to terminate this
infringement are being taken.>>
This is amazingly clear. One of the great people of modern day bagpiping has
been forced to use the courts to protect his intellectual property rights.
The motivation of Dougie W. does not matter - rumours as to his motivation do
not matter - the kind of personal gain he receives for this does not matter.
The law is clear, the significant facts are clear, Robert MacNeil's position
is clear, (it is very easy to prove that Dougie's stolen software is a slighly
changed version of BMW Gold).
Theft is theft.
Downloading that software is copying stolen software.
If your favourite piping store's clerk turned their back, would you steal the
BMW Gold copy from the shelf?
Bob D.
-------------
having much fun with web pages, including:
http://members.aol.com/bdunsire
http://members.aol.com/bagpipeweb (Bagpipe Web Directory - 1400+ links)
http://www.user.dccnet.com/bcpipers/index.htm (BC Pipers' Association)
ccc31807
etc., should be compensated for their efforts, and should be
protected from piracy. Copying another's work is immoral,
unethical, illegal, mean, selfish, stupid, and just plain wrong.
On the other hand, I also feel strongly that situations like
this must be resolved simply on the basis of the facts, and in
copyright cases, it's usually just a matter of point by point
comparison. I would no more take one person's word that a
copyright has not been violated (or has been violated) than I
would accept the score of a ball game as final halfway through
the first inning.
I don't know who's right and wrong, and I am not qualified to
judge. Neither is anyone else who has chimed in, particularly
the principals involved. They have a financial stake and should
not be the judge of their own case. Both of them have said
exactly what you would expect, and their statements are worth
exactly as much as the paper they are written on, which is
absolutely nothing. My advice would be to let the matter take
it's natural course, and realize that in the end neither party
will feel that justice has been rendered.
(Speaking of personal interest, I've tried every software
program I could, except BWM which does not offer a demo
download, and use Lime as a matter of choice because it's
superior to the bagpipe programs in every way except ease of
use, and its cost is minimal. So as to the outcome of this
controversy, I really don't care either way, except to see that
copyright piracy, if this is what it is, is punished.)
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Maeve
news:22bcf8be...@usw-ex0102-084.remarq.com...
>So as to the outcome of this
> controversy, I really don't care either way, except to see that
> copyright piracy, if this is what it is, is punished.)
And this, in and of itself, is a joke. I've tried suing for copyright
violations in the past and it is NOT an easy thing to do. My artwork has
been pirated MANY times . . . even shipped overseas to be mass produced. I
was on a "first-name-basis" with local FBI agents and Federal Marshals . . .
and nothing could be done. I had 5 pieces of artwork pirated ... they could
not be prosecuted as a group. Each one had to have it's own individual
lawsuit, each one costing a minimum of $5,000 to start the court action.
Another artist friend of mine took HIS case to the limits ... spent $65,000
out of pocket to win the case. The judge awarded him $85,000 PLUS court
costs. The pirate filed bankruptcy the next day and opened another business
under his wife's name that week. They started the pirate business all over
again. My friend got a piece of paper . . . and the pirate continued to make
money on OUR products. I realize that the pirate in this case is not making
any money . . . . but I'm not sure that a copyright does much in a court of
law against pirates. All of my copyrights were registered with the Library
of Congress which only means that, if I sue and win, I could get my court
costs back. I have a real bitter taste in my mouth from pirates, copyright
laws, and our justice system (or lack of). Good luck, Rob. I hope you ARE
successful in this. I lost over $500,000 through the infringement on my
copyrights, never mind the pain, grief and work that I went through in the
effort to prosecute. I'd feel better if SOMEONE could win.
--
Love and Light be with you,
Maeve . . . in sunny Florida!
http://people.delphi.com/terralyn
authoring http://sandykeith.com
"To live is the rarest thing in the world.
Most people exist, that is all."
Oscar Wilde
Don Robertson
delete this piece of crap from my machine. Damn him anyway.
I'm PISSED
Don
"toxic piper" <agpiper...@brothersjudd.zzn.com.invalid> wrote in
message news:08b3ac62...@usw-ex0109-069.remarq.com...
Bob Smith
Piping software, then thats fine. I have done a little development work and I
can assure you it consumes months of your life, surely he deserves a just
return on his reserch. let me put it this way, would you go to work every day
and let someone else take your pay cheque, or stop you going to collect it...
I think you may just be a little pissed.
Bob
Bagpiip2
The truth is, there's much more to this story than meets the eye. The guy is
listed as one of the original authors. Figure out who must've gotten shorted on
their paycheck to go and post the software for free...
Tim Sullivan
> If your favourite piping store's clerk turned their back, would you steal
the
> BMW Gold copy from the shelf?
NO! (But I'd be tempted to slip those 1900's vintage Silver and Ivory
Henderson's into my trouser pocket . . . . !)
ccc31807
stake, but I have had the experience of seeing a booklet I wrote
published by womeone else, with the other person's name as
author, with the resulting loss of several hundred dollars. Not
enough to sue over.
Software pirates belong in jail. This is my opinion.
On the other hand, in this case, who is the pirate? A friend of
mine, a private individual, had his idea "stolen" by a large,
multinational corporation, and was lucky to get a check for it
in the low five figures. To me, it's just as conceivable that DW
stole the software as it is that he had it stolen from him, if
indeed there was a theft in the first place.
Let's don't be too quick to judge. But having judged, let's do
justice in a manner that will serve as a lesson in the future.
Bob Smith
Bob
bogus address
bdun...@aol.comNOSPAM (Bob Dunsire) writes:
> The motivation of Dougie W. does not matter - rumours as to his
> motivation do not matter - the kind of personal gain he receives
> for this does not matter.
Oh yes it does.
Morality matters more than law, and the two don't have to agree.
So far we haven't been given enough information to judge the ethics
of this situation.
(Not having a system I can run it on I'm not about to get either
version, but if either MacNeil or Wickstrom would care to do a Mac
or Linux port I might be interested).
========> Email to "jc" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce. <========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html food intolerance data and recipes,
freeware logic fonts for the Macintosh, and Scots traditional music resources
Bagpiip2
So is your presumption of guilt. I erred on the side of innocent until all the
facts are known, and the whole storys told. There is more to come I'm sure.
Bill Tubbs
The definition of theft is still pretty clear, and you've described it
pretty well. But to help out our less-educated friends, maybe your next
release of BMW Gold could have a small dictionary attached that explains
'theft' a bit more clearly.
I've witnessed a lot of folks name-dropping on your behalf in the past year,
but I'm glad to actually read something directly from you.
Good luck in your pursuit.
Bill
Robert MacNeil <r...@istar.ca> wrote in message
news:392C08C4...@istar.ca...
> A Statement from Robert MacNeil P.Eng. on Bagpipe Software Copyright
> Infringement
>
> Based on the advice of my intellectual property counsel, I have the
> following statement to make.
>
> For the record, I am Robert MacNeil P.Eng. of Robert MacNeil Musicworks,
> owner, inventor, designer and developer of Bagpipe Music Writer, Bagpipe
> Music Writer Pro and Bagpipe Music Writer Gold, and composer of several
> well known bagpipe compositions (e.g. "Jack's Welcome Home", "Murdoch
> MacAlister", "The Pile Driver") which have appeared in many published
> pipe music collections including my own. I am, and have been recognized
> by my peers as, the primary champion in the piping community for the
> rights of bagpipe music composers with regard to the protection of their
> intellectual property from unauthorized distribution. I must now take
> actions to protect my own software intellectual property from
> unauthorized distribution.
>
> Doug Wickstrom was formerly involved in the development of Bagpipe Music
> Writer Gold. On the evening of May 21, I was informed that he had posted
> a program called "Bagpipe Player" on a website and had sent a notice to
> this bagpipe newsgroup offering it for free download. Several people
> have examined the program and stated on this newsgroup that it is
> "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold".
>
> I have examined the program and can confirm that "Bagpipe Player" has
> been produced from the source and accessory files for "Bagpipe Music
> Writer Gold" with references to "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold" changed to
> "Bagpipe Musicworks", "Bagpipe Reader" or "Bagpipe Player" and
> references to "Robert MacNeil", "Robert MacNeil Musicworks", and the
> names of many famous pipers who contributed advice on some features in
> "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold" eliminated. There are also many other
> documented, undocumented and unintended items and actions in "Bagpipe
> Player" that are exactly the same as "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold", and
> consequently it is in infringement of my company's copyright.
>
> "Bagpipe Player" has not been authorized for distribution by Robert
> MacNeil Musicworks. Its unauthorized distribution, reproduction or use
> by Doug Wickstrom or any other parties is an infringement of the
> copyright and intellectual property rights of Robert MacNeil Musicworks.
> Appropriate legal steps to terminate this infringement are being taken.
>
>
Royce Lerwick
wrote:
>This is conjecture
>Bob
The presumption of correctness goes to the author, not the marketing
agent. Unless the Agent has proof of ownership the author owns the
code.
Royce
Royce Lerwick
wrote:
>Rob, I hope you're taking names. Looks like lots of admissions here ;-))
>
>The definition of theft is still pretty clear, and you've described it
>pretty well.
Of course, theft by definition requires ownership. A work for hire is
"owned" by the guy supposed to pay for it. If that end of the contract
is not satisfactory to the guy creating it, the question of copyright
"ownership" is immediately suspect and by definition falls back to the
guy who actually wrote the code.
Royce
John Brock
I think it depends on the status of the relationship. Assuming there
was no special contract in place to the contrary, if Doug was an employee
when he wrote it, the company owns it and is liable for paying wages. If
Doug was a consultant when he wrote it, he has legal standing as to it's
ownership until he is paid.
Either way it's a sad mess.
Jon Brock
Dan Maker
> The definition of theft is still pretty clear, and you've described it
> pretty well. But to help out our less-educated friends, maybe your next
> release of BMW Gold could have a small dictionary attached that explains
> 'theft' a bit more clearly.
And perhaps in his next edtition he'll provide support, and a usable printed
manual.
To date I've purchased BMW Gold, registered same and emailed the provided
support/contact email address asking for a usable printed manual, even
offering to pay for said material.
To date I have recieved nothing beyond the software which I purchased from
a distributor, not the publisher. Not even an auto-responder email thanking
me for my question/registration or anything else.
I find the software to be adequate but the support to very substandard. I
routenly get much better support on the Free (as in speach and beer) Open
Source/GPL software I use.
Go ahead and argue that we won't have decent software unless it's paid for.
Your arguments fall on deaf ears here.
Dan
--
Linux Advocate * Fiber Junkie * Piper * Genealogist
Bagpipe FAQ - http://www.xmission.com/~redbeard/rmmb_fom/cache/1.html
Chris Eyre
I don't want you to get the wrong impression here. I would never condone
stealing anything. And as for Rob, I know very well the great reputation
that Rob has as a piper.
What I am thinking right now is - what the hell induced this man to do a
thing like this? He is obviously a professional programmer. Why would he
jeopardise his valuable reputation by doing such a thing as this? Surely
there must be a valid reason for his actions - in his eyes at least. That's
all I'm saying. Why would he do a thing like this - and put his credentials
alongside it?
Chris Eyre
Bob Dunsire <bdun...@aol.comNOSPAM> wrote in message
news:20000524195106...@ng-ch1.aol.com...
> Oh No...
>
> I'm a bit worried people might try to downplay the significance of this
> situation.
> We have facts, in the statements of Robert MacNeil:
>
> <<Doug Wickstrom was formerly involved in the development of Bagpipe Music
> Writer Gold. >>
>
> (Something any registered user of BMW Gold already knew - his name is in
the
> credits of BMW Gold.)
>
> continuing from Robert MacNeil:
>
> <<On the evening of May 21, I was informed that he had posted a program
called
> "Bagpipe Player" on a website and had sent a notice to this bagpipe
newsgroup
> offering it for free download
> .....big snip ....
> There are also many other documented, undocumented and unintended items
and
> actions in "Bagpipe Player" that are exactly the same as "Bagpipe Music
Writer
> Gold", and consequently it is in infringement of my company's copyright.
> ...little snip...
> Its unauthorized distribution, reproduction or use by Doug Wickstrom or
any
> other parties is an infringement of the copyright and intellectual
property
> rights of Robert MacNeil Musicworks. Appropriate legal steps to terminate
this
> infringement are being taken.>>
>
> This is amazingly clear. One of the great people of modern day bagpiping
has
> been forced to use the courts to protect his intellectual property rights.
>
> The motivation of Dougie W. does not matter - rumours as to his motivation
do
> not matter - the kind of personal gain he receives for this does not
matter.
>
> The law is clear, the significant facts are clear, Robert MacNeil's
position
> is clear, (it is very easy to prove that Dougie's stolen software is a
slighly
> changed version of BMW Gold).
>
> Theft is theft.
>
> Downloading that software is copying stolen software.
>
> If your favourite piping store's clerk turned their back, would you steal
the
> BMW Gold copy from the shelf?
>
Keith E. Albee
>>This is conjecture
This whole thread is conjecture, until some actual facts come out - but let's
not let that stop us!
Royce Lerwick
wrote:
>Royce:
> I think it depends on the status of the relationship. Assuming there
>was no special contract in place to the contrary, if Doug was an employee
>when he wrote it, the company owns it and is liable for paying wages. If
>Doug was a consultant when he wrote it, he has legal standing as to it's
>ownership until he is paid.
> Either way it's a sad mess.
>
>Jon Brock
Like you say, "if" he was an employee, which is a very specific legal
definition which is rather hard to prove unless you really think the
guy actually came in every day from 8-5 and punched a time clock, had
a benefit package and had his wage packet electronically transferred
to his bank account every week.
If it was one guy with an idea for a product, and he convinced another
guy who actually could create the product, and some sort of
"handshake" deal, well, like I say, the guy who actually sat down and
wrote the code is in the position of ownership, and the other guy,
whoever he might be and however much money he might have spent
marketing and packaging it, is not too firmly connected with the
product itself. But the market is so small anyway everyone ends up the
loser in a tiff like this.
Royce
Bagpiip2
>not let that stop us!
It never has yet.
Bob Smith
what must have taken hundreds of hours to create. Surely you can see we have to
know. Most of us very gratefull for the work you have done and for Rob McNeil's
commision for you to do the work . Have you have been wronged or do you feel
agreeved about something . Perhaps you just like to see us all snipe at each
other trying to work out what is going on.
Bob
John Brock
Royce Lerwick <pmle...@wavetech.net> wrote in message
news:392ddd76...@news.mn.mediaone.net...
> On Thu, 25 May 2000 15:15:37 -0700, "John Brock" <j...@mcneel.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Royce:
> > I think it depends on the status of the relationship. Assuming there
> >was no special contract in place to the contrary, if Doug was an employee
> >when he wrote it, the company owns it and is liable for paying wages. If
> >Doug was a consultant when he wrote it, he has legal standing as to it's
> >ownership until he is paid.
> > Either way it's a sad mess.
> >
>
> Like you say, "if" he was an employee, which is a very specific legal
> definition which is rather hard to prove unless you really think the
> guy actually came in every day from 8-5 and punched a time clock, had
> a benefit package and had his wage packet electronically transferred
> to his bank account every week.
>
> If it was one guy with an idea for a product, and he convinced another
> guy who actually could create the product, and some sort of
> "handshake" deal, well, like I say, the guy who actually sat down and
> wrote the code is in the position of ownership, and the other guy,
> whoever he might be and however much money he might have spent
> marketing and packaging it, is not too firmly connected with the
> product itself. But the market is so small anyway everyone ends up the
> loser in a tiff like this.
>
> Royce
Yup. Zactly.
JB
Jim Price
why not grab a practise chanter and practise music?
Jim
mac
most people can't afford the $100 for the programme, the free download is
only really available to computer literate and this makes the amount of
people that actually down load and use very small, the market from shops
will not disappear and will no doubt not be affected by a free copy, like
other programs,ligit or otherwhise, that have appeared on the web. people
who can't pay either through not being able to afford or willing to pay
$100, might and so bagpipe writing software is available to more
people...this means more great presented, hopefully good, tunes
appearing...if this is a pirate which is debateable anyhows...
And finally... this instrument seems to be the only instrument I can think
of were the people playing make the least money...
Bagpiip2
>why not grab a practise chanter and practise music?
>
Well why not grab our pirated (speculatory) copy of BMW and play along with it,
whilest learning new tunes at the same time?
Then you can get pc time, on the PC.
Bagpiip2
Good point! I wouldn't have spent that much (I heard $150) on it, or any other
bagpipe prog, so there was no lost sale here, because I otherwise wouldn't have
it at all.
I ESPECIALLY would never pay that much for a prog without first trying a demo
of it.
Doug Wickstrom
I spent 3 1/2 years writing BMW GOLD from scratch, without any financial
compensation, on the verbal (no wriiten contract) promise of receiving
royalies. In addition I had to pay for developement tools, not all as Rob
payed for Fontographer, and computer costs which were plenty. After
completeing BMW Gold Rob had me build him a file conversion utility, which
he sent me checks for. I still haven't received anything for BMW Gold. We
tried to come to an agreement with regards to partnership but him and his
wife wanted controlling interest of an Incorporated company we once planned
to form.
Rob claims I used his BMW DOS program to create BMW GOLD. Using Visual C++
and new Windows technologies, it would be difficult to encorporate any old C
DOS code into a 32 bit Windows program that has to run on Windows NT. This
is his sole basis for assuming authorship of my code. Rob has never laid
eyes on the code of BMW GOLD, let alone written any of it.
Doug Wickstrom
Robert MacNeil <r...@istar.ca> wrote in message
news:392C08C4...@istar.ca...
> A Statement from Robert MacNeil P.Eng. on Bagpipe Software Copyright
> Infringement
>
> Based on the advice of my intellectual property counsel, I have the
> following statement to make.
>
> For the record, I am Robert MacNeil P.Eng. of Robert MacNeil Musicworks,
> owner, inventor, designer and developer of Bagpipe Music Writer, Bagpipe
> Music Writer Pro and Bagpipe Music Writer Gold, and composer of several
> well known bagpipe compositions (e.g. "Jack's Welcome Home", "Murdoch
> MacAlister", "The Pile Driver") which have appeared in many published
> pipe music collections including my own. I am, and have been recognized
> by my peers as, the primary champion in the piping community for the
> rights of bagpipe music composers with regard to the protection of their
> intellectual property from unauthorized distribution. I must now take
> actions to protect my own software intellectual property from
> unauthorized distribution.
>
> Doug Wickstrom was formerly involved in the development of Bagpipe Music
> Writer Gold. On the evening of May 21, I was informed that he had posted
> a program called "Bagpipe Player" on a website and had sent a notice to
> this bagpipe newsgroup offering it for free download. Several people
> have examined the program and stated on this newsgroup that it is
> "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold".
>
> I have examined the program and can confirm that "Bagpipe Player" has
> been produced from the source and accessory files for "Bagpipe Music
> Writer Gold" with references to "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold" changed to
> "Bagpipe Musicworks", "Bagpipe Reader" or "Bagpipe Player" and
> references to "Robert MacNeil", "Robert MacNeil Musicworks", and the
> names of many famous pipers who contributed advice on some features in
> "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold" eliminated. There are also many other
> documented, undocumented and unintended items and actions in "Bagpipe
> Player" that are exactly the same as "Bagpipe Music Writer Gold", and
> consequently it is in infringement of my company's copyright.
>
> "Bagpipe Player" has not been authorized for distribution by Robert
> MacNeil Musicworks. Its unauthorized distribution, reproduction or use
> by Doug Wickstrom or any other parties is an infringement of the
> copyright and intellectual property rights of Robert MacNeil Musicworks.
> Appropriate legal steps to terminate this infringement are being taken.
>
>
Bagpiip2
>compensation, on the verbal (no wriiten contract) promise of receiving
>royalies. In addition I had to pay for developement tools, not all as Rob
>payed for Fontographer, and computer costs which were plenty. After
>completeing BMW Gold Rob had me build him a file conversion utility, which
>he sent me checks for. I still haven't received anything for BMW Gold. We
>tried to come to an agreement with regards to partnership but him and his
>wife wanted controlling interest of an Incorporated company we once planned
>to form.
>
>Rob claims I used his BMW DOS program to create BMW GOLD. Using Visual C++
>and new Windows technologies, it would be difficult to encorporate any old C
>DOS code into a 32 bit Windows program that has to run on Windows NT. This
>is his sole basis for assuming authorship of my code. Rob has never laid
>eyes on the code of BMW GOLD, let alone written any of it.
>
>Doug Wickstrom
Doug,
I'm glad to hear the whole story here on the NG. I got that story from someone
else, and am glad to have it confirmed by you.
I don't blame you for doing anything you feel compelled too.
Good luck, and thanks for a wonderful program.
Bill
Bob Dunsire
think)..
Seems you forgot to think about just a few of the facts that you mention?
And those facts are pretty important.. And those facts are the basis for the
legal actions being taken against you..
Reading your 'two cents' we can all see that:
You had an agreement - you admit that. You decided you didn't like the
agreement (after your coding was done - humm).
Why did you wait until your coding was complete to let RM know you wanted a
different agreement? Perhaps you thought you could just take BMW GOLD as your
own, and sell it, and make lots of money? (And you tried to do that, but ...)
Seems you forgot to mention your failed attempts to make the big bucks selling
your illegal version of BMW GOLD.
You have used software RM bought for you, you have kept software RM bought for
you, and you have not paid RM for that software.. What do we call that -
humm??? (In fact you have used that software to create an illegal copy of RM's
software, and then give it away)
The idea that Robert MacNeil and his wife would want to control their own
corporation - I can't imagine it any other way.
The idea that a rented coder body would want to have control of a corporation
for which he just WRITES code.. Wow, as a professional from the field of
software development, I would find that funny,except that you are serious.. so
I find it very sad..
Lawyers and bagpipe software - gee, thanks (for nothing) dw...
Bagpiip2
>
>And those facts are pretty important..
The real fact is his names listed as owner even before MacNeils on every copy
of BMW gold sold.
It's HIS software.
>And those facts are the basis for the
>legal actions being taken against you..
We'll see if if they issue an injunction, and if anything comes of it.
ccc31807
Now just wait a minute, Bob. As much as I admire your work, and
your good, positive posts over the years, I think that you may
have been led astray by your close relationship with RM.
I DO NOT know the details, and I'm really not all that
interested. But what we do have is a statement from RM saying
that he paid for the merchandise and that he owns it, and a
statement from DW saying that RM didn't pay for the merchandise
and that he doesn't own it. We also have, apparently, a long
history of oral "contracts" and disgreements and pruchases and
payments and plans and corporations and etc., and so forth and
so on.
Sounds to me that we really do not have a case of piracy at all,
which was what I thought at first, but a disagreement between
two businessmen that they very stupidly let go out of control.
Unfortunatly, this happens all the time.
I'll tell you what's going to happen, not trying to predict the
future, but just based on nothing more than the statements made
by the principals on the ng. RM sues DW. There are two
witnesses, RM and DW. DW wins. Why? Because the burden of proof
is on RM, and as long as the only two witnesses tell conflicting
stories, without any other proof, the one with the burden of
affirmatively proving his case loses. The same thing BTW would
be true if DW was suing RM; he would also lose for the same
reason.
Royce Lerwick
Was that supposed to be able to compose music? I haven't had time to
look at it but it didn't seem to be anything but a
player/converter/editor.
Royce
Bagpiip2
Nope! I'm not quite ready for composing tunes yet... <g>