ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) (08/08/90)
[ apologies if this in fact old news... it surprised me... ]
NoiseTracker V2.0 is now out! This is apparently an upgrade to an earlier
version of this program (ie, not NT V1.2), as it returns to the old "Spectrum
Analyzer" display rather than 1.2's scope graph, and all the output lines are
back in hexadecimal. I miss those. HOWEVER.....
o It now has a built-in sampler! This allows you to make new instruments
easily if you have a digitizer (Perfect Sound or like), and also has a
few options for editing samples, either ones you make or old instruments
you load in. Very nice! Although, as usual, cryptic...
o It now has MIDI, fer goshsakes! I thought this was a rather odd option
to add for a program designed to create Soundtracks for demos/games, etc.
but there it is. No comments on this as I haven't messed with it yet.
o My favorite new feature actually isn't new: This program includes both
the much improved PLST-loader from NoiseTracker with a complete PLST-
editor like SoundTracker's! Both in the same program...
The archive I got had no documentation, so all these new features are a bit
mysterious for now. However, these features (especially the PLST!) are well
worth figuring out. I forget where Rob told me he got this archive from; it
was an FTP site. (Thanks Rob!) I will post that when I find out. However, for
a limited time only! I will mail this archive (Which includes NT2.0, Intui-
Tracker V1.1) to anyone who emails me asking for a copy. (I won't post it to
comp.binaries.amiga since Tad apparently is a bit wary of this product...it
was removed freom Xanth, for some reason...) I can't keep this up forever,
so act now, as they say... and happy tracking!
(Since this has no documentation, I will be including V1.2's doc file with it.
However, if you're not familiar with NoiseTracker already, be warned that it's
a weird program, and takes considerable getting used to. I obviously can't
attempt to help everyone whom I send this too... sorry... but good luck!)
BTW, does anyone have any kind of story about this program? I mean, it seems
like a group effort among the Amiga Community.. people keep making their
own versions of it, from SoundTracker 2.3 to 2.5 to Noisetracker, et al...
interesting...
--
//..is|While 1 DO|Erin,Erin,where are|Art of Noise space| -- Ceej (=
\X/there| Fork; |you? /-----------.-^------------------|ceej@pawl.rpi.edu
AMIGAany|----------^-----|Cebhq gb or|Reclaimer:Hey!That's| gmry@mts.rpi.edu
(=other?|HOW DO YOU FEEL.|Yvoreny! (=|mine! Bring it back!|aka Chris Hillerytadguy@abcfd01.larc.nasa.gov (Tad Guy) (08/08/90)
In article <CN0$-~=@rpi.edu> ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) writes: > NoiseTracker V2.0 is now out! ... Boy Howdy. > I won't post it to comp.binaries.amiga since Tad apparently is a bit > wary of this product...it was removed freom Xanth, for some reason... Because it has never been proven that NoiseTracker isn't based at least in part on SoundTracker, which is a copyrighted product. This is why I won't carry it. However, I (currently) don't have a problem with original composition modules, or with IntuiTracker (the playback program, which appears to be untainted). You'll see these on abcfd20 in the future... ...tad
bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) (08/08/90)
In article <CN0$-~=@rpi.edu> ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) writes: >[ apologies if this in fact old news... it surprised me... ] > >NoiseTracker V2.0 is now out! This is apparently an upgrade to an earlier >version of this program (ie, not NT V1.2), as it returns to the old "Spectrum >Analyzer" display rather than 1.2's scope graph, and all the output lines are >back in hexadecimal. I miss those. HOWEVER..... [List of new features deleted] >The archive I got had no documentation, so all these new features are a bit That doesn't surprise me... (More about this below.) >mysterious for now. However, these features (especially the PLST!) are well >worth figuring out. I forget where Rob told me he got this archive from; it >was an FTP site. (Thanks Rob!) I will post that when I find out. However, for >a limited time only! I will mail this archive (Which includes NT2.0, Intui- >Tracker V1.1) to anyone who emails me asking for a copy. (I won't post it to >comp.binaries.amiga since Tad apparently is a bit wary of this product...it >was removed freom Xanth, for some reason...) I can't keep this up forever, >so act now, as they say... and happy tracking! NoiseTracker as well as SoundTracker are hacked up versions of a commercial program e.g pirated copies. NoiseTracker 2.0 is supposed to be a commercial release (apparantly they have an agreement with the original author of soundtracker). [More stuff deleted] >BTW, does anyone have any kind of story about this program? I mean, it seems >like a group effort among the Amiga Community.. people keep making their >own versions of it, from SoundTracker 2.3 to 2.5 to Noisetracker, et al... >interesting... Well, you could call it a group effort. Unfortunately it's a cracker group effort. There are, however, programs similar to SoundTracker that are compatible and freely distributable. MED from AmigaLibDisk 349, for example. --- Bjorn Knutsson / USENET: bjornk@bula.se or sunic!sics!bula!bjornk Stangholmsbacken 44 / Phone : +46-8-710 7223 S-127 40 SKARHOLMEN / "Oh dear, I think you'll find reality's on the S W E D E N / blink again." -- Marvin The Paranoid Android
hclausen@adspdk.CBMNET (Henrik Clausen) (08/09/90)
>In article <CN0$-~=@rpi.edu> ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) writes: >BTW, does anyone have any kind of story about this program? I mean, it seems >like a group effort among the Amiga Community.. people keep making their >own versions of it, from SoundTracker 2.3 to 2.5 to Noisetracker, et al... >interesting... Very interesting, in fact. The current NoiseTracker seems to be written by two danes (LaBri == Lars and Brian). Presumeably, they disassembled the original (commercial, I think) Sound- Tracker - really back to the asm source, and set off to add stuff and improve the workings of the original. This was (is) of course illegal, but read on. Various NT versions have been around in Europe (2.1 is RSN), and is very popular, judging from the discussions around it, but it also seems to be incompatible with certain hardware configurations. It's written purely in Asm of course. The author (Karsten Obrowski) of SoundTracker of course met these NT versions on various BBS systems. First he was probably angered, but the improvements on SoundTracker where so dramatic that he ended up being quite pleased with it. He's currently considering placing SoundTracker in the Public Domain, and this would solve the current legal problems around NoiseTracker. We had this brought up in the Danish Amiga Echo on FidoNet. Among others, one of the authors (Lars) of NT showed up, and we discussed this to the end. We decided that there's no real reason to be concerned about the legal mess, though it's strictly speaking partly stolen from an original, commercial program. I hope Marco doesn't pick up his Flame thrower now :-) Real interesting piece of code hacking! Have a nice day -Henrik -- | Henrik Clausen, Graffiti Data (Fido: 2:230/22.33) | | ...{pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmehq!adspdk!hclausen | \__"Do not accept the heart that is the slave to reason" - Qawwali trad__/
ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) (08/09/90)
Well, as expected, the demand for this program has already been great (17 requests in one day and 3 more came in while I was responding to those!) That's fine; it's no work to hit <r> and ~r nt20.luu to send anyone a copy, so keep asking! Now, I will say this: I did NOT know that SoundTracker was a copyrighted and commercial product, and in fact I still don't know this. NoiseTracker never claimed to be anything other than a derivative of SoundTracker (and, indeed, later versions of SoundTracker claim to be based on some versions of Noise- Tracker; it's all pretty confusing), and the docs I got with SoundTracker 2.5 say right out "This is based on MasterSoundTracker V1.0 by TIP/PROPHETS and mainly on Soundtracker V2.2 by Unknown/D.O.C". I don't know if there's some copyright violation buried in here somewhere or not; the impression I always got was that some cracker out there wrote a demo-maker program and a bunch of other crackers got ahold of it and improved on it. Whether or not the authors were pirates of any kind (let's face it, this was originally at least designed to compose music for group "demos" and crack screens) has nothing to do with this PROGRAM being pirated. So, until I hear some evidence of this being an illegal program, I'll keep sending to folk; keep on asking! I'd like to get this program around so people will write some good music for the Amiga (and if they do, I'd like to get a copy!). (Please note that I do, truly, say this in all innocence; if someone out there can show me that this isn't distributable, maybe even someone connected with any original version, please DO let me know and I will, of course, stop sending it out.) Enjoy all! -- //..is|While 1 DO|Erin,Erin,where are|Art of Noise space| -- Ceej (= \X/there| Fork; |you? /-----------.-^------------------|ceej@pawl.rpi.edu AMIGAany|----------^-----|Cebhq gb or|Reclaimer:Hey!That's| gmry@mts.rpi.edu (=other?|HOW DO YOU FEEL.|Yvoreny! (=|mine! Bring it back!|aka Chris Hillery
bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) (08/09/90)
In article <!*!%_C^@rpi.edu> ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) writes: [Stuff about sending out 20 illegal copies of NoiseTracker deleted] >Now, I will say this: I did NOT know that SoundTracker was a copyrighted and >commercial product, and in fact I still don't know this. NoiseTracker never Well, I can agree that you may not be sure that this is the case, but you HAVE been told, and you have obviously not stopped distributing copies yet. Now, that makes you a pirate in my book. >claimed to be anything other than a derivative of SoundTracker (and, indeed, >later versions of SoundTracker claim to be based on some versions of Noise- >Tracker; it's all pretty confusing), and the docs I got with SoundTracker 2.5 >say right out "This is based on MasterSoundTracker V1.0 by TIP/PROPHETS and >mainly on Soundtracker V2.2 by Unknown/D.O.C". I don't know if there's some >copyright violation buried in here somewhere or not; the impression I always Yes, there most certainly is, since the original SoundTracker is a commercial product written by Karsten Obarski. I have seen the original. And while these hacked up version may be a lot better, they are still illegaly modified versions of his original program. Furthermore, the program you are distributing, NoiseTracker 2.0, is a ripped off beta of a commercial re-release of SoundTracker. Most likely the authors of NoiseTracker have worked out some kind of deal with the original author of SoundTracker. Anyway, NT 2.0 will, according to my sources (and I don't work for a magazin for nothing) be released as a commercial product RSN. As for this crap about "This is based on <whatever> by <whoever>", I have read similar notes in the documentation for something called "MasterSeka" and other illegal versions of the (in crackergroups) popular assembler K-Seka. Now, I know that K-Seka is a commercial product too, since I have seen the original of that too. What I'd like to know is: If I steal Marco's "ATalk III", hack it up a little and call it "MasterATalk", does this make it OK for me to distribute for free? Is that OK with you Marco? (Hey! You know I wouldn't pull a stunt like that, put that shotgun away... :-) >got was that some cracker out there wrote a demo-maker program and a bunch of >other crackers got ahold of it and improved on it. Whether or not the authors >were pirates of any kind (let's face it, this was originally at least designed >to compose music for group "demos" and crack screens) has nothing to do with >this PROGRAM being pirated. So, until I hear some evidence of this being an >illegal program, I'll keep sending to folk; keep on asking! I'd like to get >this program around so people will write some good music for the Amiga (and >if they do, I'd like to get a copy!). Great. Then see to it that you become the North American distributor and sell the original instead of ripping off the author. >(Please note that I do, truly, say this in all innocence; if someone out there >can show me that this isn't distributable, maybe even someone connected with >any original version, please DO let me know and I will, of course, stop >sending it out.) No you're not innocent. You would be if you had stopped distributing it the moment you heard that it might not be a freely distributable program. But now you're just another pirate. >Enjoy all! > > >-- > //..is|While 1 DO|Erin,Erin,where are|Art of Noise space| -- Ceej (= >\X/there| Fork; |you? /-----------.-^------------------|ceej@pawl.rpi.edu >AMIGAany|----------^-----|Cebhq gb or|Reclaimer:Hey!That's| gmry@mts.rpi.edu >(=other?|HOW DO YOU FEEL.|Yvoreny! (=|mine! Bring it back!|aka Chris Hillery --- Bjorn Knutsson / USENET: bjornk@bula.se or sunic!sics!bula!bjornk Stangholmsbacken 44 / Phone : +46-8-710 7223 S-127 40 SKARHOLMEN / "Oh dear, I think you'll find reality's on the S W E D E N / blink again." -- Marvin The Paranoid Android
hclausen@adspdk.CBMNET (Henrik Clausen) (08/10/90)
>In article <10129@bula.se> bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) writes: >[Stuff about sending out 20 copies of NoiseTracker deleted] >Well, I can agree that you may not be sure that this is the case, but >you HAVE been told, and you have obviously not stopped distributing >copies yet. Now, that makes you a pirate in my book. Pirates are people that copy illegal programs systematically and in large quantities. Distributing a nice program that seems to be PD, but may or not be, is certainly not piracy. He's a nice guy, it seems, perhaps a bit naive :-) >What I'd like to know is: If I steal Marco's "ATalk III", hack it up a >little and call it "MasterATalk", does this make it OK for me to >distribute for free? Is that OK with you Marco? (Hey! You know I >wouldn't pull a stunt like that, put that shotgun away... :-) Comparing the NT / ST heritage to ATalk III is WAY out of porpotions. ATalk is way above ST with respect to completeness, stability, compatibility, support - and size! I'm not advocating reverse engineering, hacking, Asm or piracy. Just attempting to speak words of common sense. Most people cheat in little ways in the dark. Software, taxes, lying, politics, etc. Of course, someone might step up and say "I'm truely an Angel" :-] Disclaimer: I never even saw either SoundTracker or NoiseTracker! Exclaimer: I *hate* heated discussions. Flames by mail, please. Have a nice (cool) day -Henrik PS Bjorn, did you happen to read the netiquette lately? No? -- | Henrik Clausen, Graffiti Data (Fido: 2:230/22.33) | | ...{pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmehq!adspdk!hclausen | \__"Do not accept the heart that is the slave to reason" - Qawwali trad__/
borgen@sfd.uit.no (Borge Nost) (08/10/90)
In article <10129@bula.se> Bjorn Knutsson <bjornk@bula.se> writes: > >As for this crap about "This is based on <whatever> by <whoever>", I >have read similar notes in the documentation for something called >"MasterSeka" and other illegal versions of the (in crackergroups) >popular assembler K-Seka. Now, I know that K-Seka is a commercial >product too, since I have seen the original of that too. The world goes in circles; Promax of Kefrens(one of the "famous" Seka-hackers) is said to soon be releasing a commercial assembler that will be Seka-compatible(same commands, use etc.) (Read it in a Danish computer magazine) BTW, these "new" Sekas are actually very good for hacks(demos etc.), but not as zippy as my ArgAsm. >Bjorn Knutsson / USENET: bjornk@bula.se or sunic!sics!bula!bjornk -- |//// ______________ don't use R/r(eply)! *mail* me ______________ \\\\| |/// ...and then there was AMIGA... \\\| |// internet: borgen%stud1@sfd.uit.no (Boerge Noest) \\| |/ studying at the worlds northernmost university \|
ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) (08/11/90)
Well, I made my retraction once, and apparently it bounced. Apologies if somehow some of you are seeing this twice, but it's important that this get out. If you are seeing this for the second time now, go ahead and hit N since I'm just retyping what I remember entering before; however, if you could, hit "r" first and let me know that it did hit the net twice. I don't think the first one made it. Due to pressure, I am forced to retract my offer to send a copy of NoiseTracker 2.0 to anyone who wants it. I do this because doubts have been raised as to whether this program is, in fact, legally redistributable, both because of rather hazy origins and due to it possibly being released as a commercial venture soon. Whether this is accurate, or it a commercial effort will be made to sell this in America, is not known. I am not taking back this offer because I tired of sending out the copies; indeed, I was very much enjoying meeting and talking to new people and mailing this program, and had hopes of creating a mailing list for the acquirement and distribution of sound modules for NoiseTracker. (I may still do this; certainly the modules aren't copyrighted, and one can still use IntuiTracker to play them.) To all those who wrote me: stay in touch! If anyone can come up with some evidence that I can legally distribute this program, please do so and I will gladly resume mailings. Now, I must take a moment and respond to the person who informed me of this. bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) writes: >Well, I can agree that you may not be sure that this is the case, but >you HAVE been told, and you have obviously not stopped distributing >copies yet. Now, that makes you a pirate in my book. >As for this crap about "This is based on <whatever> by <whoever>", I >have read similar notes in the documentation for something called >"MasterSeka" and other illegal versions of the (in crackergroups) >popular assembler K-Seka. Now, I know that K-Seka is a commercial >product too, since I have seen the original of that too. >What I'd like to know is: If I steal Marco's "ATalk III", hack it up a >little and call it "MasterATalk", does this make it OK for me to >distribute for free? Is that OK with you Marco? >see to it that you become the North American distributor >and sell the original instead of ripping off the author. >No you're not innocent. You would be if you had stopped distributing >it the moment you heard that it might not be a freely distributable >program. But now you're just another pirate. >--- >Bjorn Knutsson / USENET: bjornk@bula.se or sunic!sics!bula!bjornk >Stangholmsbacken 44 / Phone : +46-8-710 7223 >S-127 40 SKARHOLMEN / "Oh dear, I think you'll find reality's on the >S W E D E N / blink again." -- Marvin The Paranoid Android I am very, very upset by this response. The tone and insult of this letter were unneeded; sarcasm and name-calling were unneccesary; and indicating that I deliberately and knowledgably broke any laws was not called for. I did indeed decide to continue mailng NoiseTracker after having once been told that it might _possibly_ (and I emphasize that; the distinct impression I got from reading Knutsson's first posting was that he was relating a story he'd heard, not that what he was saying was, to him, factual, regardless of whether that was how he intended it) have been based on a previous commercial product as I had only this one opinion to go on (indeed, I still only have this one say-so) and had had no reason at all to suspect previously that it was anything other than freely distributable; indeed, everything I had available pointed to it being exactly that, ie. references in the doc files and it's previous availability from FTP sites. (Indeed again, this program itself originated from an FTP site.) In his second posting, he at least provided some backing for his claim and indicated that it could be an upcoming product. Fine, so to be safe, I will stop distributing. But it pains me to think that such unkindness to achieve a point is still considered to be effective and necessary in today's world. I think it was and is apparent to most outside observers that I was not trying to undermine the author's creative rights but merely to get around what I feel to be an innovative and useful product. Enough rebuttal. Please don't bother to flame me for this response. Not only do I not want to hear it as I am writing this in anger, but I'm not going to bother to read in this subject again anyway so I won't see it. -- //..is|While 1 DO|Erin,Erin,where are|Art of Noise space| -- Ceej (= \X/there| Fork; |you? /-----------.-^------------------|ceej@pawl.rpi.edu AMIGAany|----------^-----|Cebhq gb or|Reclaimer:Hey!That's| gmry@mts.rpi.edu (=other?|HOW DO YOU FEEL.|Yvoreny! (=|mine! Bring it back!|aka Chris Hillery
bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) (08/12/90)
In article <hclausen.2337@adspdk.CBMNET> hclausen@adspdk.CBMNET (Henrik Clausen) writes: >>In article <10129@bula.se> bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) writes: >>[Stuff about sending out 20 copies of NoiseTracker deleted] > >>Well, I can agree that you may not be sure that this is the case, but >>you HAVE been told, and you have obviously not stopped distributing >>copies yet. Now, that makes you a pirate in my book. > > Pirates are people that copy illegal programs systematically and in >large quantities. Well, I'd consider 20 copies a large quantity... > Distributing a nice program that seems to be PD, but may or not be, >is certainly not piracy. He's a nice guy, it seems, perhaps a bit naive :-) Well, I wouldn't complain so loud if he had stopped distribution the moment he got an indication that the program wasn't freely distributable. >>What I'd like to know is: If I steal Marco's "ATalk III", hack it up a >>little and call it "MasterATalk", does this make it OK for me to >>distribute for free? Is that OK with you Marco? (Hey! You know I >>wouldn't pull a stunt like that, put that shotgun away... :-) > > Comparing the NT / ST heritage to ATalk III is WAY out of porpotions. >ATalk is way above ST with respect to completeness, stability, compatibility, >support - and size! Yes, but that does not make a difference in my book. A program can't be "slightly copyrighted" or "almost free". It's either freely distributable (subject to terms) or not. This is a "not"-case. > I'm not advocating reverse engineering, hacking, Asm or piracy. Just >attempting to speak words of common sense. Most people cheat in little >ways in the dark. Software, taxes, lying, politics, etc. Well now, if I were to, for example, steal a couple of pencils from the office hardly anybody, not even my boss, would care much. However, if I announced on the net that anyone who wanted to, could get free pencils from me, I guess that would upset people. > Exclaimer: I *hate* heated discussions. Flames by mail, please. No flame, just an explaination. >-- >| Henrik Clausen, Graffiti Data (Fido: 2:230/22.33) | >| ...{pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmehq!adspdk!hclausen | >\__"Do not accept the heart that is the slave to reason" - Qawwali trad__/ --- Bjorn Knutsson / USENET: bjornk@bula.se or sunic!sics!bula!bjornk Stangholmsbacken 44 / Phone : +46-8-710 7223 S-127 40 SKARHOLMEN / "Oh dear, I think you'll find reality's on the S W E D E N / blink again." -- Marvin The Paranoid Android
bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) (08/12/90)
In article <&A#%%`%@rpi.edu> ceej@pawl.rpi.edu (Chris J Hillery) writes: [Lot's of stuff deleted] >Enough rebuttal. Please don't bother to flame me for this response. Not only >do I not want to hear it as I am writing this in anger, but I'm not going to >bother to read in this subject again anyway so I won't see it. I won't. I'll take it to email. I'd just like to apologize for perhaps being unecessarily insulting and abusive. Please understand that I'm on a hair-trigger when it comes to piracy. I run a BBS here in Sweden and I delete at least one user every week for uploading pirated copies of programs. And this despite the fact that the BBS is widely known for its hard line against any form of piracy. >-- > //..is|While 1 DO|Erin,Erin,where are|Art of Noise space| -- Ceej (= >\X/there| Fork; |you? /-----------.-^------------------|ceej@pawl.rpi.edu >AMIGAany|----------^-----|Cebhq gb or|Reclaimer:Hey!That's| gmry@mts.rpi.edu >(=other?|HOW DO YOU FEEL.|Yvoreny! (=|mine! Bring it back!|aka Chris Hillery --- Bjorn Knutsson / USENET: bjornk@bula.se or sunic!sics!bula!bjornk Stangholmsbacken 44 / Phone : +46-8-710 7223 S-127 40 SKARHOLMEN / "Oh dear, I think you'll find reality's on the S W E D E N / blink again." -- Marvin The Paranoid Android
S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET (Brian Wright) (08/12/90)
Hello,
I have a few comments & questions about Noistracker and it's so-called
commercial release. First, since Noisetracker was based on Soundtracker
2.3 so the docs say. Since 2.3 is based on 2.2 on back to the original author
of the commercial release of soundtracker 1.0. We suppose that the original
author's code was hacked to create the hacker versions of Soundtracker. Well
If this is the case how can a HACKED version of an original release become
commercial? First the original author must agree to this. What about all
the subsequent authors to 2.3? Are they going to get compensation for the
work they have done? What they did wasn't right, but they did put a lot
of work into the product. Should they be consulted as to the commercial
release and fitness of the product? Just some thoughts and questions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=======================================================================
||To steal from one is plagiarism. To steal from many is research. ||
||___________________________________ ---UNKNOWN--- ||
|| | / / ||
||---Brian Wright | / / ||
||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga ||
||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! ||
=======================================================================papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (08/12/90)
In article <9008111912.AA01990@jade.berkeley.edu> S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET (Brian Wright) writes: > I have a few comments & questions about Noistracker and it's so-called >commercial release. First, since Noisetracker was based on Soundtracker [...] >If this is the case how can a HACKED version of an original release become >commercial? First the original author must agree to this. It can't. ALL the 'hacked' copies are an infringment of the rights of the original author. > What about all >the subsequent authors to 2.3? Are they going to get compensation for the >work they have done? What they did wasn't right, but they did put a lot >of work into the product. Should they be consulted as to the commercial >release and fitness of the product? Just some thoughts and questions. Whatever these 'authors' did was illegal, and as far as rights they have NOTHING. Modifying original code does NOT give ANY rights to the one making the modifications. This is known as "modification of pre-existing material", and all rights on the modifications are maintained by the original author. In fact, all these thieves (I like that better than pirates because that IS what they are) are fully liable for copyright infringement. -- Marco -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "Xerox sues somebody for copying?" -- David Letterman -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET (Brian Wright) (08/12/90)
On 11 Aug 90 21:16:22 GMT you said: >In article <9008111912.AA01990@jade.berkeley.edu> S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET >(Brian Wright) writes: >> I have a few comments & questions about Noistracker and it's so-called >>commercial release. First, since Noisetracker was based on Soundtracker >[...] >>If this is the case how can a HACKED version of an original release become >>commercial? First the original author must agree to this. >It can't. ALL the 'hacked' copies are an infringment of the rights of the >original author. It can't what? Be released as a commercial product? If NT 2.0 is a BETA of a commercial release then who is releasing it? Is the original author of The Ultimate Soundtracker releasing it? If not then it can't be released as commercial anything to anybody according to what you have just said. That's to bad too. From what I have seen of Soundtracker and NoiseTracker they would make excellent products. I don't condone what the hackers did but the results of their efforts (no matter how immoral) are here. It would be nice to see the original author of The Ultimate Soundtracker allow these programs at least the right to survive in PD form (or even shareware with donations given to the original author). >Whatever these 'authors' did was illegal, and as far as rights they have >NOTHING. Modifying original code does NOT give ANY rights to the one >making the modifications. This is known as "modification of pre-existing >material", and all rights on the modifications are maintained by the >original author. In fact, all these thieves (I like that better than pirates >because that IS what they are) are fully liable for copyright infringement. > >-- Marco >-- >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >"Xerox sues somebody for copying?" -- David Letterman >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= As you have pointed out the Hacker/Code Modifiers (Thieves as you call them) would then not get any compensation for the PD or shareware programs. Perhaps even to remove the names of the Hackers off the programs before placing them into PD or shareware. Perhaps we should support MED 2.0 instead. That piece of software has NO controversy associated with it and has the source code included. It's also on a Fred Fish disk. It supports MIDI as well. By the way, will there be ANY Soundtracker/MED type programs that WILL work on the 3000? Commercial, PD or Shareware? Thanks in advance.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ======================================================================= ||To steal from one is plagiarism. To steal from many is research. || ||___________________________________ ---UNKNOWN--- || || | / / || ||---Brian Wright | / / || ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || =======================================================================
ESDYKE@MTUS5.BITNET (Erick Dyke) (08/12/90)
An interesting question would be, What if the modifications were distributed as patches? None of the original code would be released, the author would get his bucks, and legit owners would get an improved program. This has been done quite a bit on the Amiga....Patches for everything from the PCTools from extras, to programs that remove security from programs (A bit shady...But nice for legit users...) are distributed quite a bit and no one seems to mind. But...is it legal? I talked to my company lawyer, for -hits and grins so to speak, and he was not sure but it was his belief that you can mangle software you OWN as much as you like, you just cant distribute it in MOST cases (More on that later), and that you can market anything to enhanse an existing program the same as you can write a book to use Word Perfect. As long as you dont distribute WP with your book. The reason I said most cases above is that he thought that their was some percentage, between 40-70%, that if you changed the code that much, and the changes were -->INSERT some legal term for actual improvements not just bug fixes, or changing the text for the help file <-- you could resell it under a different name. From my knowledge of programming it would seem to me to be real tough to add 40% of GOOD changes to a program, but who knows..... Well, I did what he said not to do....Quote him...If anyone cares he said he would try to find time to look for the actual laws on the stuff. He said that they seem to change daily, if anyone cares I post the actual stuff when he finds it... Erick
ludde@adder.bula.se (Erik Lundevall) (08/13/90)
In article <9008120043.AA03382@jade.berkeley.edu> S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET (Brian Wright) writes: >It can't what? Be released as a commercial product? If NT 2.0 is a BETA >of a commercial release then who is releasing it? Is the original author of >The Ultimate Soundtracker releasing it? If not then it can't be released >as commercial anything to anybody according to what you have just said. >That's to bad too. From what I have seen of Soundtracker and NoiseTracker >they would make excellent products. I have heard that the authors of NoiseTracker 2.0 have come to an agreement with the original author & distributor of SoundTracker, which is supposed to distribute NoiseTracker. >I don't condone what the hackers did but the results of their efforts (no >matter how immoral) are here. It would be nice to see the original author of >The Ultimate Soundtracker allow these programs at least the right to survive >in PD form (or even shareware with donations given to the original author). *** stuff deleted *** >into PD or shareware. Perhaps we should support MED 2.0 instead. That >piece of software has NO controversy associated with it and has the source code >included. It's also on a Fred Fish disk. It supports MIDI as well. I have seen two SoundTracker/NoiseTracker-like programs which are not based on any SoundTracker code and are freely distributable; MED and ComPositive. And they are nice multitasking programs as opposed to SoundTracker/NoiseTracker. It seems a better idea to support these programs than hoping that a commercial program and its hacked versions will become legal and freely distributable. >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ======================================================================= >||To steal from one is plagiarism. To steal from many is research. || >||___________________________________ ---UNKNOWN--- || >|| | / / || >||---Brian Wright | / / || >||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || >||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || > ======================================================================= --- -Erik Lundevall EMail: ludde@adder.bula.se | ludde@nada.kth.se BBS: Camelot - Sweden's 1st Amiga BBS (+46 8 348523) "You never fail until you have stopped trying."
new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New) (08/13/90)
In article <26554@usc.edu> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes: >This is known as "modification of pre-existing >material", and all rights on the modifications are maintained by the >original author. >-- Marco But what if all the 'hackers' modifying the code bought their own copies? If I buy a commercial program, modify it for myself, and then only give away the modifications to those who prove that they bought the original, I don't know that that is illegal. I dealt with a company that added 8087 support to Microsoft's BASIC compiler this way. If you send them $$$ and the original disk, they would return the disk with a new version of the compiler (clearly a modification of the original, and not any kind of rewrite) that would drive the 8087 directly for floating-point. It seems to me that in this case, the modifications do not belong to Microsoft, and that the new version of the compiler actually belongs to both Microsoft *and* the other company (whose name I forget); hence the need for the original disk. Can you clarify this, Marco? What if the mods to SoundTracker were distributed as a patch file instead of the whole program? Then it seems the hackers would retain the rights to the modifications, yes? -- Darren -- --- Darren New --- Grad Student --- CIS --- Univ. of Delaware ---
joseph@valnet.UUCP (Joseph Hillenburg) (08/14/90)
S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET (Brian Wright) writes: > On 11 Aug 90 21:16:22 GMT you said: > >In article <9008111912.AA01990@jade.berkeley.edu> S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET > >(Brian Wright) writes: > >> I have a few comments & questions about Noistracker and it's so-called > >>commercial release. First, since Noisetracker was based on Soundtracker > >[...] > >>If this is the case how can a HACKED version of an original release become > >>commercial? First the original author must agree to this. > > >It can't. ALL the 'hacked' copies are an infringment of the rights of the > >original author. > > It can't what? Be released as a commercial product? If NT 2.0 is a BETA > of a commercial release then who is releasing it? Is the original author of > The Ultimate Soundtracker releasing it? If not then it can't be released > as commercial anything to anybody according to what you have just said. > That's to bad too. From what I have seen of Soundtracker and NoiseTracker > they would make excellent products. > > I don't condone what the hackers did but the results of their efforts (no > matter how immoral) are here. It would be nice to see the original author of > The Ultimate Soundtracker allow these programs at least the right to survive > in PD form (or even shareware with donations given to the original author). > > >Whatever these 'authors' did was illegal, and as far as rights they have > >NOTHING. Modifying original code does NOT give ANY rights to the one > >making the modifications. This is known as "modification of pre-existing > >material", and all rights on the modifications are maintained by the > >original author. In fact, all these thieves (I like that better than pirate > >because that IS what they are) are fully liable for copyright infringement. > > > >-- Marco > >-- > >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > >"Xerox sues somebody for copying?" -- David Letterman > >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > As you have pointed out the Hacker/Code Modifiers (Thieves as you call them) > would then not get any compensation for the PD or shareware programs. Perhap > even to remove the names of the Hackers off the programs before placing them > into PD or shareware. Perhaps we should support MED 2.0 instead. That > piece of software has NO controversy associated with it and has the source co > included. It's also on a Fred Fish disk. It supports MIDI as well. > > By the way, will there be ANY Soundtracker/MED type programs that WILL work o > the 3000? Commercial, PD or Shareware? Thanks in advance.... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ======================================================================= > ||To steal from one is plagiarism. To steal from many is research. || > ||___________________________________ ---UNKNOWN--- || > || | / / || > ||---Brian Wright | / / || > ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || > ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || > ======================================================================= I agree...We should start useing MED. After all, MED is better yhan SoundTracker AND NoiseTracker, and it is ALMOST 100% compatible. Plus, it has MIDI and can read SoundFX files. (It might read SMUS, but I havent tried it yet... -Joseph Hillenburg InterNet: joseph@valnet UUCP: iuvax!valnet!joseph PC-Link: Joe Hillenburg Most other systems: Joseph Hillenburg Don't buy a computer unless it's an Amiga - Me - AMIGA RULES! - AMIGA RUL
rps2@amoeba2.UUCP (Rick Stevens) (08/15/90)
>In article <10180@bula.se> bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) writes: >In article <hclausen.2337@adspdk.CBMNET> hclausen@adspdk.CBMNET (Henrik Clausen) writes: >>>In article <10129@bula.se> bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) writes: >>>[Stuff about sending out 20 copies of NoiseTracker deleted] >> >>>Well, I can agree that you may not be sure that this is the case, but >>>you HAVE been told, and you have obviously not stopped distributing >>>copies yet. Now, that makes you a pirate in my book. >> >> Pirates are people that copy illegal programs systematically and in >>large quantities. First, just what the devil is an "illegal program"? >Well, I'd consider 20 copies a large quantity... Actually, doing even 1 copy of a copyrighted program is pirating. If the program is copyrighted, you make a copy, and sell it, you've infringed on the copyright and you are a pirate. I don't wanna start another flame fest or thread regarding what is and isn't pirating, but in my book if you have a copyrighted program and didn't get it from the publisher or a distribution channel (retailer, distributor, etc.) authorized by the publisher, then you own a pirated program. Period. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rick Stevens, Small Scale Systems of Southern California sysop@xyclone.uucp | rps2@amoeba2.uucp | CIS: 75006,1355 | BIX: smallscale "I'm tellin' ya, Valiant! Da whole ting stinks like yesterday's diapers!" - Baby Herman -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mapjilg@gdr.bath.ac.uk (J I L Gold) (08/17/90)
One of the major uses of Soundtracker is to produce scores for demos/games or whatever. In order for this to work the player routine must be called in a 50Hz vertical blank interrupt. As far as I can make out, the MED player routine functions as a separate task, and so will not work in a program where the system call Forbid() has been made to turn off multitasking (ie games, demos...) Or am I showing my ignorance again? Comments? Help? -- # J.Gold | mapjilg@uk.ac.bath.gdr # # University of Bath , UK | jilg@uk.ac.bath.maths # # The more improbable an event is, the more likely it is to happen :-) #
David.Plummer@f70.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG (David Plummer) (08/18/90)
Well how about we forget the legalities of this problem and face the real issue. A bunch (or even just one) of programmers spent weeks or months working on the original SoundTracker, so why take away what is rightfully theirs by distributing a version someone else has modified? Whether or not it is legal is one thing, but I don't think it is fair to the programmers no matter how you look at it. -- David Plummer - via FidoNet node 1:140/22 UUCP: ...!alberta!herald!weyr!70!David.Plummer Domain: David.Plummer@f70.n140.z1.FIDONET.ORG Standard Disclaimers Apply...
S36666WB@ETSUACAD.BITNET (Brian Wright) (08/18/90)
On 14 Aug 90 21:33:40 GMT you said: >Actually, doing even 1 copy of a copyrighted program is pirating. If the >program is copyrighted, you make a copy, and sell it, you've infringed on >the copyright and you are a pirate. Giving it away infringes on copyrights also. >I don't wanna start another flame fest or thread regarding what is and isn't >pirating, but in my book if you have a copyrighted program and didn't get it >from the publisher or a distribution channel (retailer, distributor, etc.) >authorized by the publisher, then you own a pirated program. Period. Sorry to split hairs, but you can also purchase a used program (manuals and all) from an individual and that isn't considered pirating. That is assuming that the program was an ORIGINAL to begin with and the first owner DIDN'T keep a copy for himself. > - Baby Herman ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ======================================================================= ||To steal from one is plagiarism. To steal from many is research. || ||___________________________________ ---UNKNOWN--- || || | / / || ||---Brian Wright | / / || ||---s36666wb@etsuacad.etsu.edu | \ \/ / Only Amiga || ||---Commercial Artist and Amigaphile| \/\/ Makes It Possible!! || =======================================================================
jcs@crash.cts.com (John Schultz) (08/18/90)
In article <1990Aug17.104306.17285@gdr.bath.ac.uk> mapjilg@gdr.bath.ac.uk (J I L Gold) writes: >One of the major uses of Soundtracker is to produce scores for demos/games >or whatever. In order for this to work the player routine must be called in a >50Hz vertical blank interrupt. As far as I can make out, the MED player routine >functions as a separate task, and so will not work in a program where the >system call Forbid() has been made to turn off multitasking (ie games, demos...) >Or am I showing my ignorance again? >Comments? Help? A VBlank interrupt is not necessary, as the audio hardware generates interrupts after the last word of data has been fetched. This allows audio interrupts to stuff the registers with the next sound before the first has finished. As long as DMA is not turned off, the next sound will continue immediately after the previous sound. See the Amiga Hardware Manual for more info. On the subject of stopping sounds immediately and starting a new sound cleanly, what's the best way to do this? Currently I do: move.w d2,intena(a0) ; disable 7-10 (aud) interrupts move.w d2,intreq(a0) ; clear any 7-10 interrupts move.w d6,dmacon(a0) ; shut off dma for both channels move.w #0,ac_dat(a3) ; write directly to output (to stop) move.w #0,ac_dat(a4) ; write directly to output (to stop) move.w #1,ac_per(a3) ; fast period (less waiting) move.w #1,ac_per(a4) ; fast period (less waiting) move.w #$c000,intena(a0) ; enable wasteloop move.w intreqr(a0),d5 ; wait for interrupt and.w d2,d5 ; test against current mask beq.b wasteloop ; not yet occurred ; Interrupt has occured, channel is stopped. move.w d2,intreq(a0) ; clear two 7-10 interrupts Is there a better way to do this? John
nfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg) (08/22/90)
What is/are SoundTracker/NoiseTracker programs? They sound similar to MED, which I've tried once and didn't get any sound out of, but people talk of them as if they are commercial. I've never seen them available anywhere. Thanks, ---Mike, -- A man said to the Universe "Sir, I exist!" | Michael Figg DSAC-FSD "However," replied the Universe, | DLA Systems Automation Center "The fact has not created in me a | Columbus, Ohio sense of obligation."- Stephen Crane | mfigg@dsac.dla.mil CIS: 73777,360
joseph@valnet (Joseph Hillenburg) (08/23/90)
nfs1675@dsacg3.dsac.dla.mil ( Michael S Figg) writes: > > What is/are SoundTracker/NoiseTracker programs? They sound similar to MED, > which I've tried once and didn't get any sound out of, but people talk of > them as if they are commercial. I've never seen them available anywhere. > > Thanks, > > ---Mike, > > -- > A man said to the Universe "Sir, I exist!" | Michael Figg DSAC-FSD > "However," replied the Universe, | DLA Systems Automation Center > "The fact has not created in me a | Columbus, Ohio > sense of obligation."- Stephen Crane | mfigg@dsac.dla.mil CIS: 73777,3 Ok...MED 2.10 (Which, by the way, is on Xanth (/incoming/amiga/MED210.LHW)) is a Sound/NoiseTracker clone, which is far superior. MED has MIDI, and can read SouundTracker files, as well as SoundFX files (It doesn't say this - I found it out myself) -Joseph Hillenburg (Sultan of Asm) INET: joseph@valnet.uucp |MAIL: 1709 West Gray UUCP: ...!iuvax!valnet!joseph |MAIL: Bloomington, IN 47401 AT&T: 1-812-336-2969 |MAIL: United States CompSci BBS: 3/12/24 1-812-876-4407 9:30 pm-7:30 am |Mail replies requested Those aren't bugs! Just undesirable features!