W8SDZ@SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL (Keith Petersen) (09/08/88)
[Exec-PC BBS is one of the largest MS/PCDOS-oriented systems in the country] ----- A STATEMENT FROM THE EXEC-PC BBS CONCERNING THE RECENT SEA VS PKWARE SUIT This entire statement was authored by and is the opinion of Bob Mahoney. When SEA came out with the ARC format, I banned it from the Exec-PC BBS because the arcing and unarcing programs from SEA were too darn slow. As soon as PKware released the super fast PKXARC and PKARC programs, I approved the ARC format for the Exec-PC BBS because processing the arc file format on the typical computer of the time (4.77 mhz PC) was no longer a test of user endurance and patience. The speed of the PKware products made the arc format a valid format. Now that the SEA vs PKware suit has confused all of us, angered many of us, and has brought the issue to the forefront, it is time for some decisions. Exec-PC has decided the following: As soon as PKware brings out a new format for creating crunched/squeezed/squashed/packed/tramped collections of files, that new format will be used for ALL files on the Exec-PC BBS. At last count Exec-PC had more than 16,000 files online in the arc format. Many sysops are nervous about the amount of work required to convert to a new format. I don't understand what the problem is. A simple batch file can be created for unarcing all the old files, then rePAKing them into the new format. SUMMARY: Watch for the new file compression format on Exec-PC. The simple evolutionary process that brought us the SQUEEZED file, then the LBR file, then the arc file will soon take one more predictable step. SEA has left their mark, but the nagging embarrassment of threats and lawsuits has given the market a reason to evolve to the next level of file compression sooner than expected. Bob Mahoney Exec-PC multi-user BBS 414-964-5160 8/29/88
tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (09/09/88)
Bob Mahoney is being a twit on this one. Refusing ARCs in the first place was stupid, because Vern Buerg's ARCE.COM has been around forever, has always been as fast or faster than Katz's stuff, and has always been free. (It has always been fully approved by SEA and remains unaffected by the recent legal action.) Dropping ARCs now because one might have to give up Katz's assiduously hyped beg-ware is even dumber. Nobody needed PK-anything in the first place, the code was rumored to be tainted from the word "go" anyway, and now that the author has been burned by his reluctance to get approval for his product when things were friendly, he has no-one but himself to blame. Dropping ARCs out of some supposed moral outrage at the "treatment" accorded Katz is simply misguided. There is not a shred of evidence I have seen suggesting that SEA's action lacked merit. The "outraged" folks flaming here and elsewhere have not seen the facts of the case; the court HAS and the lawyers have. There is no reason to believe they are idiots. And if the allegations in the contempt motion (e.g., Katz continuing to use "ARC" in the PKPAK user manual) are factual, then that looks pretty much open & shut too, though I wouldn't expect much more than a comply order from the judge this time around. Any BBS that places the convenience and welfare of its *users* first, should post ARCE.COM prominently for users wishing to extract archived files from the libraries, and ARC.EXE for users wishing to build their own archives. (For fast building, ARCA.COM is available free from Vern.) Anything else is just playing politics, and the users lose. -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding) -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)
roth@mrsvr.UUCP (The Unknown Programmer) (09/09/88)
In article <6324@dasys1.UUCP>, tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: [...] > accorded Katz is simply misguided. There is not a shred of evidence I > have seen suggesting that SEA's action lacked merit. The "outraged" > folks flaming here and elsewhere have not seen the facts of the case; > the court HAS and the lawyers have. There is no reason to believe they [...] > -- > Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff > "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF > will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding) The courts have not decided anything. The parties made an agreement between themselves. No court has passed any judgement at this time on the situation. The complaints and agreements are publicly available at the Milwaukee Fed. court, and they have been posted to several BBSes and USENET. =================opinion by: Dean A. Roth====================== {rutgers, uwvax} uwmcsd1!mrsvr!roth -or- roth@mrsvr.UUCP {rutgers, uwvax} uwmcsd1!lakesys!deanr -or- deanr@lakesys.UUCP P.O. Box 11095 Milwaukee, WI 53211 =================representing Dean A. Roth=====================
pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) (09/10/88)
In article <6324@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes:
...folks flaming here and elsewhere have not seen the facts of the case;
...the court HAS and the lawyers have. There is no reason to believe they
...are idiots.
You're kidding, right?
Pete Holsberg UUCP: {...!rutgers!}princeton!mccc!pjh
Technology Division ...!att!jonlab!mccc!pjh
Mercer College CompuServe: 70240,334
1200 Old Trenton Road GEnie: PJHOLSBERG
Trenton, NJ 08690 Voice: 1-609-586-4800tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (09/11/88)
In article <374@mrsvr.UUCP> roth@mrsvr.UUCP (Dean Roth) writes: >In article <6324@dasys1.UUCP>, tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes: >> ... The "outraged" >> folks flaming here and elsewhere have not seen the facts of the case; >> the court HAS and the lawyers have. >The courts have not decided anything. The parties made an agreement >between themselves. No court has passed any judgement at this time >on the situation. The complaints and agreements are publicly >available at the Milwaukee Fed. court, and they have been >posted to several BBSes and USENET. When all else absolutely fails, Dean Roth should consider reading the article. I did not claim the court had decided anything; I claimed it, and the agreeing parties, had seen the facts, and that griping users had not. The statement stands. Certain court documents have been posted to Usenet, but the reasons underlying SEA's decision to take PK to court have not, and (I imagine) will not. Usenet members tend to be technically sophisticated as well as technically responsible in the support (if not maturity) sense. Any departmental manager in an organization under my control who chose one software package over another on the basis of how he/she felt about some court case the authors had started, would lose that responsibility darn fast. Readers here ought to hold themselves to a similar standard. I can forgive Bob Blacher who lives across town from PK and probably goes to Brewer games with him :-), but hysteria in the rest of the PC user community is just embarrassing. -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)
w8sdz@smoke.ARPA (Keith B. Petersen ) (09/11/88)
Tom Neff seems to be forgetting that SEA is allegedly threatening legal
action against other shareware authors of programs that read/write or
display the directories of ARC files.
The decision to eventually remove all ARC files from the public domain
archives is motivated by the nagging fear that the next step will be for
SEA to demand royalties from anyone distributing ANYTHING in ARCs! We
will not allow ourselves to be put in that position. Our archiving
method must be totally public domain.
--
Keith Petersen
Arpa: W8SDZ@SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL
Uucp: {att,decwrl,harvard,lll-crg,ucbvax,uw-beaver}!simtel20.army.mil!w8sdz
GEnie: W8SDZjans@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM (Jan Steinman) (09/13/88)
<...folks flaming here and elsewhere have not seen the facts of the case... the court HAS and the lawyers have. There is no reason to believe they... are idiots> I would encourage anyone interested in this subject to go see the movie "Tucker". In his closing argument at his trial, Tucker makes an impassioned plea for free enterprise, stating that if big companies keep shutting down the little guy, we'll soon be buying our cars from Japan. Everyone in the courtroom laughed; everyone in the audience laughed uneasily. Watching this ARC (oops, please don't sue me!) non-sense, and then watching "Tucker", has convinced me that soon the only innovation that will remain in America will be in the courtroom, while we buy our software and computers (as well as cars, radios, etc.) from Japan. Better make sure your kids get into law school! :::::: Software Productivity Technologies -- Experiment Manager Project :::::: :::::: Jan Steinman N7JDB Box 500, MS 50-383 (w)503/627-5881 :::::: :::::: jans@tekcrl.TEK.COM Beaverton, OR 97077 (h)503/657-7703 ::::::
leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (09/13/88)
In article <6382@dasys1.UUCP> tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) writes:
<Usenet members tend to be technically sophisticated as well as technically
<responsible in the support (if not maturity) sense. Any departmental
<manager in an organization under my control who chose one software
<package over another on the basis of how he/she felt about some court
<case the authors had started, would lose that responsibility darn fast.
<Readers here ought to hold themselves to a similar standard. I can
<forgive Bob Blacher who lives across town from PK and probably goes to
<Brewer games with him :-), but hysteria in the rest of the PC user
<community is just embarrassing.
I'm not likely to have to decide on an archiving program for the company
I work for. But if it did come up, I'd at least point out what SEA seems
to be doing. (hint does "look and feel" ring a bell?)
I'm against what they are doing for a quite non-hysterical reason. The
idea of claiming "ARC" as a trademark goes beyond ludicrous. I'm sorry,
but I have no desire to that triies to get away with something like that.
To be only slightly silly, what if Microsoft had tried this with COM,
EXE, and BAT? I fail to see how SEA's actions in the *latest* part of this
battle diiffer from the Apple vs HP & Microsoft suit, or the Lotus
"look & feel" suits. Except perhaps that it is even dumber...
--
Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I used to be a hacker. Now I'm a 'microcomputer specialist'.
You know... I'd rather be a hacker."tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (09/15/88)
Tom Neff would not dream of forgetting any of the current bumper harvest of allegations floating around. Andrew Foray on CompuServe is busy telling everyone that SEA has no objections to other shareware programs manipulating ARC files so long as the authorship is prominently dissociated from SEA. SIMTEL20's superficially commendable concern for the legal safety of its users does not withstand scrutiny in this case. Even if SEA were to demand royalties from software authors distributing their products in ARC form (and I find this wholly unbelievable) that would have nothing to do with network sites who simply store the files in question, or users who download them. Once these improbable royalties were paid that would presumably be the end of it. For all SIMTEL20 knows, there are files resident there now which incurred royalty payments of one form or another in the process of creation. Who gives a damn. Meanwhile back at the ranch, these threats/promises to convert to some as yet nonexistent bundling/compress format are nothing but political broadsides. Not that that's completely out of place here, but let's not dress it up in playclothes as a technical memo of general user interest or anything. When and if this vaporware PD packaging standard ever actually sees the light of day, and when and if extractors are successfully ported to as many places as ARC and ZOO already are, and when and if your site manages to get everything converted and integrity checked, THEN I look forward to an actual announcement from SIMTEL20. -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)
tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (09/15/88)
In article <1053@bucket.UUCP> leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) writes: >I'm not likely to have to decide on an archiving program for the company >I work for. But if it did come up, I'd at least point out what SEA seems >to be doing. (hint does "look and feel" ring a bell?) Leonard's postings show he's a smart guy, so I am confident that if the issue ever DID arise, he'd just pick up the phone, call SEA and ask how they felt. If they wanted a dollar and a sign-off, no problem. This is business after all. Better to be protected than remain in any doubt. As a hobbyist user in private life, maybe I have opinions on the overall helpfulness of some of these developments, but as a businessperson I would certainly "cut to the chase" in Mr. Gekko's memorable phrase. -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: t.neff (no kidding)