val@net23.weber.edu (Oberon Kenobi) (03/05/91)
In article <91056.225758JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu>, JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes: > ... > Mac "emulation" has hardware involved,... > ... %AHEM-I-AMBIGUOUS: "Hardware" is ambiguous in this context. Hardware must be involved; the Amiga in this case. However, the "actual" emulation of the Macintosh does not involve additional hardware. The loading of the Macintosh ROMs, however, does involve additional hardware to do it legally. Pirates have successfully (though I highly disapprove) made the A-MAX emulator entirely disk resident. This violates proprieTerry copyrights by both Apple and the producers of A-MAX. While I won't mention any names, some people need to be prosecuted. The pirate that I know shovels a lot of BS including a fictional "first use law" that makes piracy legal. "First use," according to The pirate, allows free copying of any software (i.e.: computer software, video tapes, music, etc..) as long as it originally came from a first copy. Not strange from a rampant pirate who doesn't personally believe in morals.
JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) (03/06/91)
In article <42@net23.weber.edu>, val@net23.weber.edu (Oberon Kenobi) says: > > Pirates have successfully (though I highly disapprove) made the A-MAX >emulator entirely disk resident. This violates proprieTerry copyrights by >both Apple and the producers of A-MAX. > While I won't mention any names, some people need to be prosecuted. I agree... There are too many copies of A-Max running around on disk. However, in the role of devil's advocate, I would like to bring up two rebuttal points: 1) You can't use A-Max with a Mac drive unless you buy it; you need the hardware connection. This should help keep heavy users honest. (But more importantly:) 2) Apple has cut off the supply of Mac ROMs. Many folks who want to do the legal thing and buy them cannot. If a person has made an honest effort to purchase them, can you truly fault that person for using pirated copies of the ROMs? Apple could have made its profit if it had wanted to... It chose not to. ** Before you flame me, I OWN both A-Max II and a set of legal ROMs ** But I would be interested in anyone who has a rebuttal to my points above. Kurt -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- || Kurt Tappe (215) 363-9485 || With. Without. And who'll || || 184 W. Valley Hill Rd. || deny it's what the fighting's || || Malvern, PA 19355-2214 || all about? - Pink Floyd || || jkt100@psuvm.psu.edu --------------------------------------|| || jkt100@psuvm.bitnet jkt100%psuvm.bitnet@psuvax1 QLink: KurtTappe || -----------------------------------------------------------------------
dca@toylnd.UUCP (David C. Albrecht) (03/07/91)
In article <91064.212753JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu>, JKT100@psuvm.psu.edu (JKT) writes: > In article <42@net23.weber.edu>, val@net23.weber.edu (Oberon Kenobi) says: > > > (But more importantly:) > 2) Apple has cut off the supply of Mac ROMs. Many folks who want > to do the legal thing and buy them cannot. If a person has made > an honest effort to purchase them, can you truly fault that > person for using pirated copies of the ROMs? Apple could have > made its profit if it had wanted to... It chose not to. > > ** Before you flame me, I OWN both A-Max II and a set of legal ROMs ** > > But I would be interested in anyone who has a rebuttal to my points above. A rebuttal is easy. It is completely reasonable for Apple to hold the view that you should have to buy a Mac to run Mac software. Because some clever software types came up with a sneaky way to make a Mac emulator that didn't violate Apple's copyrights doesn't mean that Apple is somehow 'wrong' in trying to stop such emulators and certainly doesn't justify ripping the ROMs off because they can no longer be obtained legally. Just because you want to emulate a Mac on your Amiga doesn't necessarily mean you have a right to do so. The Amax folks would get in touch with the people that have developed a compatible chip set based on Motif and see if they can license them for resale, thereby cutting Apple out of the loop. David Albrecht
BAXTER_A@wehi.dn.mu.oz (04/01/91)
>> >> ** Before you flame me, I OWN both A-Max II and a set of legal ROMs ** >> >> But I would be interested in anyone who has a rebuttal to my points above. > > A rebuttal is easy. It is completely reasonable for Apple to hold the view that > you should have to buy a Mac to run Mac software. Because some clever software > types came up with a sneaky way to make a Mac emulator that didn't violate > Apple's copyrights doesn't mean that Apple is somehow 'wrong' in trying to stop > such emulators and certainly doesn't justify ripping the ROMs off because they > can no longer be obtained legally. Just because you want to emulate a Mac on > your Amiga doesn't necessarily mean you have a right to do so. The Amax folks > would get in touch with the people that have developed a compatible chip set > based on Motif and see if they can license them for resale, thereby cutting > Apple out of the loop. > > David Albrecht Oh well. Guess I'll just have to keep posting this... Apple ROMS are leagally and freely (actually, for $20) available from Apple's pacific distributer, Sun Business Machines, in Kowloon, Hong Kong. Regards Alan