lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (09/04/89)
In <3523@seashore.nprdc.arpa>, apple@nprdc.arpa (James Apple) writes: > I just want to know ( from someone at commodore ) if version >1.4 of the OS will come with same license as 1.3.2. > > > If it does, I spent a lot of wasted time waiting >for 1.4 and ECS so that I could buy a amiga. > > > I do NOT WORK on nuclear research. But I AM OFFENDED >by the "license" and I will not but a commodore product that has it. I suggest you take the matter up with your government, and while you're at it, take a close look at any other software you might have around for any of the larger machines you might have access to. "If thy right winger offends thee, pluck him out of office." :-) -larry -- The Mac? Oh, that's just like a computer, only slower. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
apple@nprdc.arpa (James Apple) (09/04/89)
I just want to know ( from someone at commodore ) if version 1.4 of the OS will come with same license as 1.3.2. If it does, I spent a lot of wasted time waiting for 1.4 and ECS so that I could buy a amiga. I do NOT WORK on nuclear research. But I AM OFFENDED by the "license" and I will not but a commodore product that has it. -- Jim Apple WB1DOG apple@nprdc.navy.mil ...}ucsd!nprdc!apple
andy@cbmvax.UUCP (Andy Finkel) (09/05/89)
In article <3523@seashore.nprdc.arpa> apple@nprdc.arpa (James Apple) writes: > > I just want to know ( from someone at commodore ) if version >1.4 of the OS will come with same license as 1.3.2. The license was unclear. (even the lawyer who wrote it decided it was unclear :-) ) That 'no-nuke' paragraph was meant to only apply to EXPORTS, as this is covered by the export control act. A revised (clearer) license will be available shortly. I bet everyone was thinking we had a legal department staffed by former 60's hippies :-) andy -- andy finkel {uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy Commodore-Amiga, Inc. Life gets pretty complex the minute you stop mooing. Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.
marksm@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Mark S Madsen) (09/05/89)
In article <3523@seashore.nprdc.arpa> apple@nprdc.arpa (James Apple) writes: > I just want to know ( from someone at commodore ) if version >1.4 of the OS will come with same license as 1.3.2. > I do NOT WORK on nuclear research. But I AM OFFENDED Jim, whether the rest of the net agrees with you or against you, it sure would make the discussion a little easier to follow if you (or someone) would post, saying exactly what it is that bothers you. (Although I think you can be pretty sure (i) that Commodore-Amiga can put any licence agreement they like on their software, and (ii) that you have the inviolable right to be offended.) By the way, there is a good argument about the offensiveness of other licence agreements currently happening in comp.misc, for those who might enjoy it :-) And comp.sys.amiga's very own Peter Da Silva is right in there with them! :-) > Jim Apple WB1DOG Mark -- ####################################################################### ## Mark S. Madsen #### marksm@syma.sussex.ac.uk ################### #### Astronomy Centre, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QH, UK. ## #################### Life's a bitch. Then you die. #################
djw@ibmpcug.co.uk (DJ Walker_Morgan) (09/06/89)
> I do NOT WORK on nuclear research. But I AM OFFENDED >by the "license" and I will not but a commodore product that has it. > >Why Jim? Planning on irradiating someone? Apple happen to have (if it is the type of licence condition I think you are suggesting) a similar thing in the Hypercard Licence.... And more and more people are being smart enough to realise that they don't have to see their work corrupted and used by people who do not respect their views, or are doing something offensive in their opinion. > >-- > Jim Apple WB1DOG > > apple@nprdc.navy.mil > ...}ucsd!nprdc!apple Oh You ARE going to kill someone...... B) (I assume that's what navy.mil means) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DJ Vox UK-01-371-5755 dj at ibmpcug.... Strength Through Diversity, I couldn't have put it more plainly -- Automatic Disclaimer: The views expressed above are those of the author alone and may not represent the views of the IBM PC User Group.
niesemc@econ.vu.nl (Marco Niese) (09/06/89)
What is this about only distributing on national nets? When I call a US board and download it, would that be legal? If I go to a CBM Authorized dealer, can I get an upgrade there? If you only want virus-free, complete distribution, this could work quite well... If I buy an expensive A2500 (I did not - yet) and find out new System Software updates are only available in the US, I would not like to be the person who sold it to me. Commodore Autohorized Dealer, Commodore Autohorized Service Center, Commodore Authorized Distrubution Net... what's next? Commodore Authorized User ??? ;-) Marco Niese. (niesemc@econ.vu.nl)
Doug_B_Erdely@cup.portal.com (09/07/89)
Someone PLEASE tell Mr Apple to calm down. This was needed to make our government happy. I suggest Mr Apple inspect APPLE's License. :) - Doug - Doug_B_Erdely@Cup.Portal.Com
mjw@cs.cmu.edu (Michael Witbrock) (09/08/89)
Jim Apple says: "I do NOT WORK on nuclear research. But I AM OFFENDED by the "license" and I will not but a commodore product that has it. " - I am delighted by the 'licence' and believe that it would be an excellent tool to use in persuading people to by Commodore/A products. If it is, in fact, the new standard Commodore/A licence, than Commodore/A is a far cooler company than even the existence of the Amiga would have suggested. What you lose on the swings, you make up on the round-a-bouts. Michael
mproicou@blackbird.afit.af.mil (Michael C. Proicou) (09/08/89)
In article <cZ1iHEm00hkeE21aJy@cs.cmu.edu> mjw@cs.cmu.edu (Michael Witbrock) writes: >Jim Apple says: >"I do NOT WORK on nuclear research. But I AM OFFENDED >by the "license" and I will not but a commodore product that has it. " > >- >I am delighted by the 'licence' and believe that it would be >an excellent tool to use in persuading people to by >Commodore/A products. Yep, just tell 'em: Buy an Amiga, look at all the things you can't do with it! Mike -- Mike Proicou mproicou@blackbird.afit.af.mi osu-cis!n8emr!captain!mike
johnf@stew.ssl.berkeley.edu (John Flanagan) (09/08/89)
In article <1335@blackbird.afit.af.mil> mproicou@blackbird.afit.af.mil (Michael C. Proicou) writes: >In article <cZ1iHEm00hkeE21aJy@cs.cmu.edu> mjw@cs.cmu.edu (Michael Witbrock) writes: >>Jim Apple says: >>"I do NOT WORK on nuclear research. But I AM OFFENDED >>by the "license" and I will not but a commodore product that has it. " ... > >Yep, just tell 'em: Buy an Amiga, look at all the things you can't do >with it! Jeez, people, can we get a grip on ourselves? Someone from Commodore (Andy Finkel, I think) has already explained to us, a couple of days ago, that the anti-nuclear stuff was there in an attempt to comply with some government regulations, that it is being rewritten to make the intent more clear, and that there was NO political sentiment expressed or implied. Why do the recriminations continue? And do you really mean to tell me that you actually thought the license was meant to push some political agenda? Cripes. John Flanagan Space Sciences Laboratory johnf@sag4.ssl.berkeley.edu University of California, Berkeley (...!ucbvax!sag4.ssl!johnf) Berkeley, CA 94720 Manners Maketh Man. (415) 642-7635
iddos@TAURUS.BITNET (09/14/89)
My site does not always recieve all the News, so sorry if this was raised up already in the discussion: I understand that future updates to Amiga system will be inaccesible to me (here is what 'abroad' is over there) if I do work on nuclear reasearch. Or is it so? I must know the answer 'cause you see, I'm planning to do a lot of nuclear research in the near future, using some megatons of CLI commands. However, the company I'm with likes to play it legal, and would not be caught reselling nuclear knowledge to third world lunatics if that involves even a hint of software liscence violation. In that case, it will continue developing the ultimate doomsday weapon on a lowly 1.3-based A2000 (have you ever tried developing a doomsday weapon without 1.4 WB multitasking support? god!). Sorry! could not help ;-) :-(. -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Ido (The Id) Amin iddos@taurus.BITNET | | | +---------- Is the virtual memory of a unicorn a physical device? ------+