dmkdmk@ecsvax.UUCP (David M. Kurtiak) (09/25/88)
The following is an extract from a file that I downloaded off of a
local BBS. Here's how some of the SysOps are viewing the case:
------------==========> Cut Here <==========----------------
Date: 08-15-88 (13:57) Number: 40898
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: RICH GREENE Read: HAS REPLIES
Subj: ARC FIASCO Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I understand that V. Buerg lost his case with SEA ARC and he must cease
from distributing his program. Some of us Sysops in the Northwest are
considering changing to ZOO or use Mr. Buergs new program that he was
granted permission to distribute as soon as it's available. If you have
any information concerning the results of the lawsuit, please let us
know. This will place ALL sysops in a predicament in deciding which
utility to use and I know as with myself, it will be a pain in the you
know what to re-arc or do a Zoo on all of my 120 Megs.
Comments?
Date: 09-11-88 (17:00) Number: 43271
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: DON MARQUARDT Read: HAS REPLIES
Subj: ARC FILES Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
With the recent push to have all authors of programs that use the ARC
format or extention pay licence fees to SEA, I am wondering what they
are going to do. Also since PCB has a view option, what does that do to
the feature as well as cost? As for myself, I am ready to convert ALL
FILES to whatever format Phil comes up with and eliminate ARC completly.
Any other comments? Hope I am not starting up another hornets nest but
I am not very pleased with the action taken by SEA as well as the method
used. Beat the little guy up till you force him to give up just because
of costs. Sounds like some other outfits that can't seem to stand the
competition.
Don Marquardt
Riverside Premium BBS 312-447-8175 PCPable
Multi-Tasking & DOORS ConfERENCE
Date: 09-11-88 (17:49) Number: 43277
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: MARSHALL DUDLEY Read: (N/A)
Subj: SEA LAWSUIT Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
On the SEA vs PK affair, it seems to me that SEA is getting in a real
legal bind. Let me quote some material from "BUSINESS LAW" The Dryden
Press, 1986. Refer to this book for a more complete analysis,
especially pages 948 - 962.
Sherman Anti-trust act - An 1980 congressional enactment that (1) made
illegal every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise,
or conspriacy in restraint of trade or commerce among the several
states, and (2) made it illegal for any person to monopolize, or
attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or
persons to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the
several states.
The federal antitrust laws are enforced in several ways. Violations of
the Sherman Act are felonies and may be prosecuted in a federal
district court by the Antitrust division of the U.S. Dept of Justice.
The FTC can prosecute any violations of the Sehrman act since any
violations of the Sherman Act will also violate the Federal Trade
Commission Act. Private parties can also file civil lawsuits in a
federal district court against alleged violators of the anstitrust
laws. The plaintiffs in such a lawsuit usually are customers,
suppliers, or competitors of the defendants. The law permits
successful plaintiffs to recover TREBLE DAMAGES! Lawsuits by private
parties are an important part of antitrust enforcement - over 90% of
all antitrust cases are instituted by private parties.
Date: 09-11-88 (17:58) Number: 43278
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: MARSHALL DUDLEY Read: HAS REPLIES
Subj: SEA LAWSUIT(S) Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
OPEN LETTER TO THE FTC AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Dear Sirs:
There is a precedent being set in the computer area which will have a
tremenous impact on both the computer telecommunications industry and
the software industry in general. The vast majority of software for
personal computers is written by other than large corporations, and
this tremendous recource could be lost almost immediately. The
precedent of which I speak is the affair where the two predominate
sources of archieving programs have reached an agreement where the
first, System Enhancements Associated, will receive the source and
hold all claims to the work of the second, PK Ware. This agreement
was reached after an anti-competitive lawsuit was filed by SEA against
PK to force it's main competitor out of business. They have
effectively done this. SEA is now approaching other programers who
have written utilities to interface with the standard ARC format.
Basically every programmer or company which has embraced this format,
which was previously assumed public domain, is being threatened with a
lawsuit by SEA now. This is virtually the same as if Lotus sued
everyone who wrote a program to read data captured by 123, or by
MicroSoft for writing programs which work with DOS. This has already
had a chilling effect on independent programmers, those who are the
backbone of the personal computer business. Fact is there is very
little software that does not depend on interactions with other
programs. If this precedent is allowed to stand, the computer
software industry will be fragmented, where each company's and each
programmer's programs will only work with with their own software.
This must not be allow to happen.
SEA is also claiming rights to the word ARCHIEVE and the extension
ARC. ARCHIEVE is a word which has a long history. The IBM computer
has a bit called the archieve bit, and some archieves (not computer)
date back to early Greek times. There are only 17,576 possible 3
letter extensions. To allow a company or individual exclusive right
to any of these few extensions would make it impossible to write any
software after all extensions have been "claimed". The claiming of an
extension for exclusive use is monopolistic.
I implore you to investigate this apparent violation of the antitrust
laws before irreparable harm is done. This "agreement" must be
declared in violation of the Sherman Act. Be aware that virtually
100% of all public domain software, shareware, and demo-ware is
"ARCed" up for distribution. Well over 90% of all files transferred
via tele- communications are in the ARC format. To allow this to be
taken from the many computer users should not be taken lightly. To
allow every programmer to feel that writing a simple utility to
enhance another program can result in a devastating lawsuit will
result in loss of the computer industry's most important resource,
their programmers.
----------------------end of letter--------------------------------
I have seen several "letters" intended to be sent to SEA to try and get
them to reconsider their actions. I think letters to the FTC, and
Justice dept. might be more effective. I do think the agreement and
actions by SEA are in violation of the Sherman act. Lets everyone take
up a pin and write to one or both of these departments.
Marshall Dudley
Date: 09-12-88 (08:10) Number: 43333
To: ALL Refer#: NONE
From: DOUG LAINE Read: (N/A)
Subj: SEA Status: PUBLIC MESSAGE
I agree with everyone about the fact that SEA is really getting out of
hand. Personally, as soon as Phil can come out with a new format, I
will take as much time as needed and convert EVERY file on my
system to the new format. Im sorry if this is provocing (spelling) this
argument, but I am glad to see that there are other Sysops anoyyed by
this entire deal.
Doug
(Philly Exchange 215-563-8109 MNP5 -8137 HST)
---
Hope this may be of some use to those still following this fiasco.
---
David M. Kurtiak
UUCP: dmkdmk@ecsvax.UUCP {rutgers,gatech}!mcnc!ecsvax!dmkdmk
Bitnet: DMKDMK@ECSVAX.BITNET
Internet: dmkdmk@ecsvax.uncecs.edu