Boycott the ICR2 to N2 converter

< On Sun, 18 May 1997 Alex "The judge of marketing standards" > : What he has done is a service to us, he has put many hours into this and > : is only asking for compensation. I can see not paying for painted cars > : but this is different, Whats the difference Alex?! Both converters and graphic design take time, effort, and skill. Just because one learns C++, HTML, etc, doesnt make him more deserving of compensation in that particular field than it does someone else in another. Who are you to say who should get paid for their time and effort and use skills they have worked hard to aquire. Could it maybe be because your a better "hacker" of files than you are a so-called "Graphics artist" (which, BTW, I havent seem ANY proof of)? And the other is yours?! It seems since YOU personally like a program then that makes it ok for the person who created it to ask for compansation for services rendered. too amny people out there want somthing for Yup, with your biased and hypocritical drivel it seems you are one of them. Please T-H-I-N-K before you speak my man, or you might find your own foot inserted into your mouth. Congradulations!! You have just made "moron" of the month on my "infamous" list. Take care, -DG-

> >Yes, And we have the right to boycott greedy individuals ! Thank God its > >not about money for everybody. Hey GMT, why dont you come over to my house, mow my yard, take out my trash, and clean my comodes. I'd give you money, but I wouldnt want you to think that I thought you were greedy! -DG-

Quoted text (12 lines)

> I think all of you shouldn't buy the ICR2 to N2 converter. First I have to > say that I have nothing against the author of the program, Dave Noonan. But > I think you people shouldn't buy it because he shouldn't make money on a > thing like this. And yes I know that he spent many hours and days on the > computer writting the program, but look at the guys who wrote utilies, > making better looking cars, posting setups, forming an offline league, etc. > Many of them spend a lot of time on the computer making them too. And no > they don't get paid for doing it. They just make them because they want all > the NASCAR fans to have a better game to play in, not because they want to > make money. > Just my opinion

I agree 100%. If you wanna make money off of it get the green light from sierra to put it on a CD and sell it like they do with Duke and Quake levels and utilities. But I don't think that sierra would have any part of that. I can understand the time and effort it took, but charging people seems wrong. Jay Taylor

I've converted 4 tracks from ICR2 to N2 and graphically they are outstanding but the AI is a little shaky on the tight racing conditions. The "free tracks" that I've gotten thru the conversion utility are: Cleveland, Portland, Nazareth, and Long Beach. So, it would be nice to have Michigan, Indy, and some of the others... but to pay.... I don't know????? Of course, eventually someone will buy it, convert it and post to binaries the converted tracks in ZIP format for all to grab. Andrew

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > I think all of you shouldn't buy the ICR2 to N2 converter. First I have to > > say that I have nothing against the author of the program, Dave Noonan. But > > I think you people shouldn't buy it because he shouldn't make money on a > > thing like this. And yes I know that he spent many hours and days on the > > computer writting the program, but look at the guys who wrote utilies, > > making better looking cars, posting setups, forming an offline league, etc. > > Many of them spend a lot of time on the computer making them too. And no > > they don't get paid for doing it. They just make them because they want all > > the NASCAR fans to have a better game to play in, not because they want to > > make money. > > Just my opinion > I agree 100%. If you wanna make money off of it get the green light from > sierra to put it on a CD and sell it like they do with Duke and Quake > levels and utilities. But I don't think that sierra would have any part > of that. I can understand the time and effort it took, but charging > people seems wrong. > Jay Taylor

What he has done is a service to us, he has put many hours into this and is only asking for compensation. I can see not paying for painted cars but this is different, if he wants to give it out that is his choice, but if he wants us to pay, that is fine too. This is a fine program and many months of very hard work was put into it. I feel like he deserves some sort of compensation, too amny people out there want somthing for nothing.

I think Dave has every right to ask for compensation. Just like he said if you have a problem with it then write your own converter. I myself have no problem with him charging although I wont be buying it. I dont like road courses, and am only interested in Nazareth and Milwaukee. The price is a little steep for just two tracks but he does have the right to charge you. Although on the other hand like one guy said in this newsgroup. There have been a lot of utilities made so far and no one has charged as of yet. By the way what ever happened to Gerhard?

Quoted text (12 lines)

> I think all of you shouldn't buy the ICR2 to N2 converter. First I have to > say that I have nothing against the author of the program, Dave Noonan. But > I think you people shouldn't buy it because he shouldn't make money on a > thing like this. And yes I know that he spent many hours and days on the > computer writting the program, but look at the guys who wrote utilies, > making better looking cars, posting setups, forming an offline league, etc. > Many of them spend a lot of time on the computer making them too. And no > they don't get paid for doing it. They just make them because they want all > the NASCAR fans to have a better game to play in, not because they want to > make money. > Just my opinion

Long live the free market system. If you wanna buy it, you buy it. If you don't wanna buy it, you don't buy it. There's nothing wrong with a little entrepeneurship; I think there's been a little of it in this country's history, hasn't there?

BRAVO Alex!! > > > I think all of you shouldn't buy the ICR2 to N2 converter. First I have to > > > say that I have nothing against the author of the program, Dave Noonan. But > > > I think you people shouldn't buy it because he shouldn't make money on a > > > thing like this. And yes I know that he spent many hours and days on the > > > computer writting the program, but look at the guys who wrote utilies, > > > making better looking cars, posting setups, forming an offline league, etc. > > > Many of them spend a lot of time on the computer making them too. And no > > > they don't get paid for doing it. They just make them because they want all > > > the NASCAR fans to have a better game to play in, not because they want to > > > make money. > > > Just my opinion > > I agree 100%. If you wanna make money off of it get the green light from

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > sierra to put it on a CD and sell it like they do with Duke and Quake > > levels and utilities. But I don't think that sierra would have any part > > of that. I can understand the time and effort it took, but charging > > people seems wrong. > > Jay Taylor > What he has done is a service to us, he has put many hours into this and > is only asking for compensation. I can see not paying for painted cars > but this is different, if he wants to give it out that is his choice, > but if he wants us to pay, that is fine too. This is a fine program and > many months of very hard work was put into it. I feel like he deserves > some sort of compensation, too amny people out there want somthing for > nothing.

<big snip>

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Sorry but I agree that we should not buy the converter. This a Sierra/Papy >product that he has made changes to and now trying to sell it. We can't >make/change tracks and sell them why should he be able to sell this. I am >all for makeing tracks and that sort of stuff but sooner or later Sierra is >going to come along and put a stop to this converter. >Just my $0.02 >Rob

I agree. ICR2 and Nascar2 are the intellectual property of Papyrus (now Sierra). As I understand it from my class in law school, no one may use their products to make money without first obtaining written permission from Sierra AND the owners of these tracks in this case. I certainly will not support IP infringement. If he wants to do what Gerhard did with ICR2 and N1, that's a whole different ballgame.

I think all of you shouldn't buy the ICR2 to N2 converter. First I have to say that I have nothing against the author of the program, Dave Noonan. But I think you people shouldn't buy it because he shouldn't make money on a thing like this. And yes I know that he spent many hours and days on the computer writting the program, but look at the guys who wrote utilies, making better looking cars, posting setups, forming an offline league, etc. Many of them spend a lot of time on the computer making them too. And no they don't get paid for doing it. They just make them because they want all the NASCAR fans to have a better game to play in, not because they want to make money. Just my opinion

Quoted text (21 lines)

>>I think all of you shouldn't buy the ICR2 to N2 converter. First I have to >>say that I have nothing against the author of the program, Dave Noonan. But >>I think you people shouldn't buy it because he shouldn't make money on a >>thing like this. And yes I know that he spent many hours and days on the >>computer writting the program, but look at the guys who wrote utilies, >>making better looking cars, posting setups, forming an offline league, etc. >>Many of them spend a lot of time on the computer making them too. And no >>they don't get paid for doing it. They just make them because they want all >>the NASCAR fans to have a better game to play in, not because they want to >>make money. >>Just my opinion >I think Dave has every right to ask for compensation. Just like he >said if you have a problem with it then write your own converter. >I myself have no problem with him charging although I wont be buying >it. I dont like road courses, and am only interested in Nazareth and >Milwaukee. The price is a little steep for just two tracks but he >does have the right to charge you. Although on the other hand like one >guy said in this newsgroup. There have been a lot of utilities made >so far and no one has charged as of yet.

The main question is, is it LEGAL (from a Papyrus point of view) for Dave or anyone else to charge for a converter? Earl

Yes, And we have the right to boycott greedy individuals ! Thank God its not about money for everybody. utilities that he is selling retail. He put the work into

: What he has done is a service to us, he has put many hours into this and : is only asking for compensation. I can see not paying for painted cars : but this is different, if he wants to give it out that is his choice, : but if he wants us to pay, that is fine too. This is a fine program and : many months of very hard work was put into it. I feel like he deserves : some sort of compensation, too amny people out there want somthing for : nothing. I wasn't going to wade into this mess, but... (that's never stopped me before <g>). First, I will defend Dave the right to make money any "legal" way he can. I take slight umbrage about thinking that the amount of time and effort that one puts into creating an excellent carset is any less than a "programmer/hacker". Heck, it would be nice to have $1.00 for each person who uses mine and Richard's carset. I would use that money to get a paddock pass to the Portland race and be able to make better cars. The real issue here is one of "community". In has been the glorious history of this community of sim racers to pour "***, sweat, and tears" into making these sims more enjoyable and "realistic". In the past this has been done as a labor of love. Everything has been freely shared with the community. These people even share their techniques for free with others providing the same types of utilities. This is my real concern, are we going to "convert" this community into a little hot-bed of greedy capitalism?! Or are we going to continue to provide "excellent" utilities and "enhancements" in a sharing manner? I do not want to see the spirit that has made this community what it is, shattered. [just my $.02 worth -- put 'em all in a jar and someday you'll be rich <G>] -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I think I posted prematurely before, Michael you have said it all brother. You should run for President. Dave you have every right I guess to charge for your converter but think hard about this. I'm no big time programmer, sure I made a track or two but if Ihad the ability to bring to the community usefull utilities to make our Sim experience a little better I surely wouldn't charge for it. Dave you can charge if you want but you shouldn't. I'm neutral in the matter because I personally dont care for ICR2 tracks with the exception of Nazareth (which BTW The free version does convert) and Milwaukee. Dave respect is earned not bought. Ok now for a little praise Dave you done an excellent job with the converter.

I'm no big time programmer, sure I made a track or two but if Ihad the Sorry this should have read ( I've edited a track or two )

I haven't read much here but... If I'm correct that a person has a utility to convert tracks from ICR2 to N2. Now if he wants to sell it let him do it. If Papy has a problem with that let them handle it. Now I for one think the product is easily worth money if it does a good job of what it says it does. He's entitled to his dollars. And I'd buy it in a heartbeat if it's good, which I'll be checking out soon enough. You have the choice not to purchase it if you don't like it. I feel some of the program add-ons should be sold for at least a modest price, why not? I'd be more than happy to give a few dollars to people with good add-ons. Q.B.M.

You see, Thats why God created legitimate jobs. It is illegal without the expressed permission of Papyrus. You see, it is called theft. Can you understand this very simplistic concept

It's best to leave you all to discuss the issues (and the above is mature and reasoned) , but please people do not e-mail me with abusive and threatening post. That in itself IMHO is worse than anything I've done and I don't deserve it. At present it seems to have been a terrible mistake to have even written the converter. Dave Noonan

I also feel that this will be a great additional program to enhance an otherwise good game. But I can't help thinking about the other people who created the groundwork for this type of program and they didn't ask for compensation for their time. If the creator of this converter wants monetary compensation, he should go through the copyright procedures and sell it in stores not over the internet. I for one will not be purchasing his program.

Very well said Michael. And your contributions as well as Gerhardts is very much appreciated in the Sim community.

Hi Rob, He isn't selling a Papy/Sierra product, just a utility that will "read" from one sim, and then translate it for the other. What you would pay for then is David's "translation", and it's his right to do so. Best Regards, Marc J. Nelson The Sim Project

I Agree he has the right to charge for the converter as long as royalties are being paid to Papyrus ! That is the free market system also.

Can you understand that he doesn't require Papyrus/Sierra's permission for the TYPE of program he's created? FWIW to you, it doesn't contain any Papyrus propriatary code, so thus does not infringe on thier copyright. Best Regards, Marc J. Nelson The Sim Project

>> Long live the free market system. If you wanna buy it, you buy it. If >> you don't wanna buy it, you don't buy it. There's nothing wrong with a >> little entrepeneurship; I think there's been a little of it in this >> country's history, hasn't there? >I Agree he has the right to charge for the converter as long as royalties >are being paid to Papyrus ! That is the >free market system also. Why should he pay royalities to Papyrus? He isn't using any of their code, or distributing the modified tracks

You say he is greedy, I say you are a bunch of whining leeches. Who is to say which of us is correct. You want the full version, pay for it. If not, then don't.

It is not theft to modify a program you already own. It is theft if you modify said program then distribute the modified program. You can't very well steal something you already own. If this were theft, then why weren't all the people responsible for the N1 - ICR converters, the track converters, etc, etc, prosecuted? And why would it be ok for them to give the converter away for free, but not sell it? By your reasoning, this would still be theft. The main *** here isn't that he is dribituting his program, but that he has the gall to ask for some compensation for his work. Oh, BTW, software engineering is a legitimate job.

Well all I've heard is Money this and Money that. Where the H*** is this guys Home Page so I can DL the Track Converter and pay him his MONEY that I'm sure he well deserves. SG

Is that actually the case Marc? I'm no lawyer but I would have thought that there's a difference between giving something away and making profit from it. I find it hard to imagine that you'd be able to make money from the Portland track or NASCAR2 without being legally obligated to give some money to the track owner and/or Papyrus, and to ask them for permission in advance? Look what happened with Daytona and that was free! If Jed had been charging people, even if the program had picked up bits of Papyrus code and moved them around, I'm 100% sure that Papyrus would have had something to say about it even if Daytona hadn't. It's a bit of a shame considering that Gerhard and Jed kicked all this off and are help up as the "gods of sim-racing hacking", but Dave is being attacked for doing almost the same thing. I personally think that he is reasonable in asking for something for his efforts, but that in turn implies he must support the program and make sure it works on everyone's system that he selss it to, offers refunds, upgrades etc etc. He must also have guessed that the response would be mixed (to say the least) and given that people pirate software when they have no axe to grind, hoping to keep the full version from being posted to binaries is utopian thinking. Hopefully this storm in a teacup will blow over soon once everyone is satisfied that their opinion has been heard. -- Cheers! John (SRN-Europe) (Remove "NOSPAM" from address before replying...)

Just to try and clarify this one more time for those who cant seem to understand it, Dave's program has NO papyrus programming in it, HE wrote it it belongs to DAVE, he is selling ONLY his program. he is NOT selling converted tracks nor is he selling anything that belongs to papyrus/sierra or any track owner in the world. if you don't want to pay for Dave's programming, DONT PAY FOR IT. If you want to use the tracks from ICR2 in your N2 game, then by all means buy his program, and convert your own tracks over and use them accordingly. It is perfectly legal. there are no copywrite infringements here since he is not selling anything that was created by someone else. Now, can we please stop ***ing about this subject and give Dave the Congratulations he deserves for making one really awesome conversion program? His stuff works and works well. Stop harrassing and pissing and moaning and thank him for adding to the enjoyment factor. If you don't think he deserves to be paid for it...go to work and tell them you dont need a paycheck..they'll gladly keep it for you. Nuff said TrenT -- CatchMeIfU.........................Can

This is a totally bogus argument. People will volunteer their time when they want to, and other's who make more substantial efforts (or who feel there time is worth something more) will ask to be paid. The existence of one in no way affects the other. Joe

>You see, Thats why God created legitimate jobs. It is illegal without the >expressed permission of >Papyrus. You see, it is called theft. Can you understand this very >simplistic concept GMAFB! There is NOTHING illegal about making an addon utility for a program. There is not theft, nothing being stolen, he is not providing any data that someone has not already paid for. And what the hell's this ***about "legitimate jobs"?! Ever hear of CAPITALISM? Personally I have more respect for someone who can create a legitimate product and sell it for a living than slaves who have nothing to offer but their body, their time, and punching a clock. "Legitimate jobs" my ass. Joe

>At present it seems to have been a terrible mistake to have even written >the converter. Dave, Don't let a bunch of whining leeches (as they were so aptly called in this thread) get you down. You've created a product that a lot of people want (even if they are too cheap to pay for it) and that alone is something to be proud of. The fact that a bunch of losers whine about the fact that your time and effort is WORTH SOMETHING only serves to discredit themselves. Joe

I agree with Joe, don't get down on yourself because of the closed minded "give it to me free" people here.. you did a great job and deserve every penny you can get. TrenT -- CatchMeIfU.........................Can

<snip> : If you want to use the tracks from ICR2 in your N2 game, then by all : means buy his program, and convert your own tracks over and use them : accordingly. It is perfectly legal. there are no copywrite infringements : here since he is not selling anything that was created by someone else. I don't have the actual Papyrus license for ICR2 before me at the moment. However, most software contains a clause in the license along the following lines: "You may not use, copy, modify, or transfer the software or any copy in whole or in part, except as expressly, provided in the this license. All rights not expressly granted are reserved by the manufacturer or its suppliers." I will take a close look at Papyrus' license/agreement when I get home. Just some food for thought. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On Mon, 19 May 1997 22:01:02 +0100, "David Noonan"

Quoted text (7 lines)

>It's best to leave you all to discuss the issues (and the above is mature >and reasoned) , but please people do not e-mail me with abusive and threatening post. >That in itself IMHO is worse than anything I've done and I don't deserve >it. >At present it seems to have been a terrible mistake to have even written >the converter.

Well I knew I was going to get sucked into this thread at some point.... Dave mate, don't let the bastards get you down. It was June last year when ISC got heavy with Jan and I about Daytona and to this day, I still get abusive e-mails, practically threatening me if I don't send them my Daytona track. Whats best of all is that in my case, it was going to be free anyway! I feel that possibly because everything on The Pits is free, that people expect everything else to be free in the Sim Racing world apart from the Sims. I applaud you for what you've managed to do (and wish you'd join SimProject! ;-) and you've every right to charge for it. Basically, it's available at a price and if you don't like the price, go somewhere else. Oh, hang on.... you can't can you! And to those vorlons among you reading this, don't flame Dave. Gerhard and I don't charge for our programs because we don't want to - it's the way we are. Dave produced a product for a marketplace where there was demand. He's the retailer and can charge what he likes. As the consumer, you just have to decide if you want to pay his price or go else where. I can't remember seeing anyone screaming at a supermarket because the manager wouldn't let them have the food for free... Cheers Jed The Pits

> It is not theft to modify a program you already own. It is theft if you > modify said program then distribute the modified program. You can't very > well steal something you already own. Have you read the license agreement for any software that you think you "own." Chances are in every case that you don't "own" anything but the licensed right to use that software under certain conditions. Reverse engineering and modifying of the software and associated data files are typically specifically excluded from your list of licensed rights. (I'm not aware of the specifics of the Papyrus licenses, but those of you that "bought" the game could sit down and read your copy of the license agreement...) Why isn't everyone who speeds prosecuted every single time they speed? It's simply not practical to catch and prosecute everyone who is breaking an individual law. Agreed. ---Jim

Fine, now apply the above statement to all the converted tracks out there. Or apply it to none. It is no more wrong for someone to make a converter and release it free than it is to sell the same product. Both are forms of distribution. Actually, the free way would do the most damage. From the responses about the converter, the people aren't complaining about one existing, but that they have to pay to get it. " It is wrong!!!! (pst. Where is my free copy?? )" Bunch of two faced, whinning cry babies. Pay up, or shut up.

Just wait until Mr. Bill and Co. make it mandatory for a high school student to " volenteer " X-number of hours of community service before they can graduate. Then we will see what they think of this volenteer crap.

Quoted text (15 lines)

>On Mon, 19 May 1997 22:01:02 +0100, "David Noonan" >>It's best to leave you all to discuss the issues (and the above is mature >>and reasoned) , but please people do not e-mail me with abusive and threatening post. >>That in itself IMHO is worse than anything I've done and I don't deserve >>it. >>At present it seems to have been a terrible mistake to have even written >>the converter. >Well I knew I was going to get sucked into this thread at some >point.... >Dave mate, don't let the bastards get you down.

(snip totally agreeable text) If a copy of Daytona was esconced somewhere on the net, free for the grabbing but for conscience sake, I suspect the silence would be deafening, the strident cries of "for shame" would be drowned by hypocritical glee.:) I only point this out because I think the bastard lives in all of us, given the proper rationalization. I wonder how many are posting anti-pirate diatribes with clean Hard drives. Charge what you wish, Dave. I wish you well. regards, Gavel...track fodder in leagues everywhere! Someone has to come in 15th!!

Leech? Who's the "leech" here? This guy has taken liberties with someone else's product and is now trying to make money out of it!! What he has done, in the eyes of the law, is no different to what Microsoft did when they had their knuckles legally caned for including "Defrag" and "Scandisk" with DOS v6.2. And we all know how quickly DOS v6.22 came out after the court case!! -- Bruce. "But that was then....and this is now!" (Guess who!)

(snip) Now if he wants to sell it let him do it. If Papy has a problem with that let them handle it. (unsnip) So if someone offers you a TV set that you know has been looted from a shop, it's okay for you to buy it and it's the shop-owners problem to prosecute the original thief, is that how it works? -- Bruce. "But that was then....and this is now!" (Guess who!)

As do most crooks, but what they do to place food on the table and clothes on their families backs is not generally accepted in society as being the right way to go about it! -- Bruce. "But that was then....and this is now!" (Guess who!)

Hi Jed, I agree with everything you said. Hang in there Dave. What's "SimProject"? Are you guys working to create an "open standards" sim (i.e., something with and openly specified track and car format)? If so I might be interested in offering my user interface analysis and design skills (and programming if needed). Joe

(snip) The main question is, is it LEGAL (from a Papyrus point of view) (unsnip) The main question is, is it legal from ANY point of view? And the answer is "NO"! -- Bruce. "But that was then....and this is now!" (Guess who!)

Given that you it is impossible for a company to chase and prosecute everyone who infringes their license, do you think a company would prosecute someone making a program for free, or a program which makes money from their intellectual property? Licensing is a very strange beast, and I myself have probably infringed the Papyrus license a hundred times by posting grabbed pictures on SimNews, hacking around in the software or whatever. Just because I don't pay enough attention to it doesn't nullify it, ignorance is not an excuse. Now Papyrus have chosen to ignore that (I hope!) because it is publicising their product, AND I receive no money for it. If SimNews had been an over the counter purchase then both Marc and I would have looked a hell of a lot more closely at what we could and couldn't publish. In the US people are sued every day for tripping over slightly raised sidewalks - I think a converter that messes around with Papyrus property would be a snap for a first year law student. -- Cheers! John (SRN-Europe) (Remove "NOSPAM" from address before replying...)

I was just wondering if everybody is gonna go irrate when Papyrus ask for $$$ for their track pack? Are we all assuming that is gonna be free? :) Q.B.M.

On Sun, 18 May 1997 23:04:00 -0400 Alex Santantonio has put many hours into this and : is only asking for compensation. I can see not paying for painted cars : but this is different, if he wants to give it out that is his choice, : but if he wants us to pay, that is fine too. This is a fine program and : many months of very hard work was put into it. I feel like he deserves : some sort of compensation, too amny people out there want somthing for : nothing. I wasn't going to wade into this mess, but... (that's never stopped me before <g>). First, I will defend Dave the right to make money any "legal" way he can. I take slight umbrage about thinking that the amount of time and effort that one puts into creating an excellent carset is any less than a "programmer/hacker". Heck, it would be nice to have $1.00 for each person who uses mine and Richard's carset. I would use that money to get a paddock pass to the Portland race and be able to make better cars. The real issue here is one of "community". In has been the glorious history of this community of sim racers to pour "***, sweat, and tears" into making these sims more enjoyable and "realistic". In the past this has been done as a labor of love. Everything has been freely shared with the community. These people even share their techniques for free with others providing the same types of utilities. This is my real concern, are we going to "convert" this community into a little hot-bed of greedy capitalism?! Or are we going to continue to provide "excellent" utilities and "enhancements" in a sharing manner? I do not want to see the spirit that has made this community what it is, shattered. [just my $.02 worth -- put 'em all in a jar and someday you'll be rich <G>] -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver [address restored] =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= < Don't worry about it. (See recent post) Somebody has already made this program in essence free. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- Jason Nichols-Commissioner SportSim Football League: [link lost in import: /~taylorj/Football/] SSFL Information Center: [link lost in import] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------

On Mon, 19 May 1997 22:01:02 +0100, "David Noonan"

Quoted text (8 lines)

>It's best to leave you all to discuss the issues (and the above is mature >and reasoned) , but please people do not >e-mail me with abusive and threatening post. >That in itself IMHO is worse than anything I've done and I don't deserve >it. >At present it seems to have been a terrible mistake to have even written >the converter.

It is fair and Dave is obviouslly reading the discussion going on about if he has the right to ask for money or not. It is his right and please take note that he is from the UK where money just wont leave poms pocket coz its glued in with super glue....:-) Know offence Dave but the English are known to be a bit on the tight side when it come to parting with money....:-) As I said it is his right but if he is getting shit mail then i think that is a bit on the imature side. Discuss it in a sencible manor or hold ya fingers...:-) Shane Lansky Hobart,Tasmania Australia

snipped.. we all know what its about... More snipped and we still know what its about..:-) Well Michael after reading your post your right 100% Its the general racing comunity that has made this and most other sims alot of extra fun with the utils and car set that you all have made for the uuuummmm well lets say not so artistic ones and us non programmers. If everyone charged then I would be in debt till the turn of the next century..:-) to you lot. I was thinking he has the right to charge and as you say he still has but in the end it does make it a money hungry world. After all it converts tracks from one program to another and for an extra 40 dollars Aussie I could buy another N2. After thinking about it at about 50% of what the N2 program is from the shops it is on the dear side.... Shane Lansky Hobart,Tasmania Australia

Please correct me if I've got this wrong, but by that rational you are stating that the effort Dave put to create this converter must exceed any effort which has gone before, since he is the only one asking payment. More effort than "The Pits"?! More than Gerhard's converters? More than Tony John's put into IWCCCARS?! Whether or not one asks to get paid has nothing to do with the relative effort you put in. On an individual basis you may decide to put a greater amount of effort if someone is paying you, but you cannot then equate that to what someone else will do. -- Cheers! John (SRN-Europe) (Remove "NOSPAM" from address before replying...)

You're just totally wrong here. In the long run you have a community in which everyone tries try do their best to help others etc. etc., *or* you have a community in which everyone asks money and helping others just to help will be gone, far gone. As long as the spirit of helping for free is there, everything is fine. However, as soon as someone starts asking money for utilities like this, however great they may be, that will definately be the start of the 'commercialisation' of the simracing community. You won't be able to stop this sad trend anymore, more & more guys will start asking money and destroying the 'help & have fun' spirit of this otherwise great community. *Unless* we react to these kinds of actions fiercely. Of course he deserves acknowledgement for his work. But when we're going this way, we're going just the same way as the total Internet is going: commercialisation & grief. If that's the way we want to go, I have nothing left to say. This is not my opinion, it is a fact supported by science! ;-) -- Formula T2 Upgrade Page - http://huizen.dds.nl/~jjcox

Quoted text (10 lines)

> You're just totally wrong here. In the long run you have a community in > which everyone tries try do their best to help others etc. etc., *or* you > have a community in which everyone asks money and helping others just to > help will be gone, far gone. > As long as the spirit of helping for free is there, everything is fine. > However, as soon as someone starts asking money for utilities like this, > however great they may be, that will definately be the start of the > 'commercialisation' of the simracing community. You won't be able to stop > this sad trend anymore, more & more guys will start asking money and > destroying the 'help & have fun' spirit of this otherwise great community.

R: This is pathetic and I urge all people with add-on and carsets to start charging. Maybe a yearly subscription of $10-$20 to a web page or such. To think this area has some type of magical rights to stay free is crazy. Please bring these free loaders to their knees, they need a dose of reality. And in the end they'll learn a valuable leason. To keep you yap quite and be thankful for free stuff. Q.B.M.

IMO it's difficult to make a statement like yours, without drawing some sort of boundries for what is black, white, and what's a grey area. It's akin to making a statement that "I'm totally honest", or perhaps "I have never sinned", all with the added tag of "it's a matter of principle." If Papyrus or Sierra deemed in writing that any converted track or modified carset is an infringement on theirs or others copyright (which in a technical sense it is - according to Papyrus), then you would be forced to delete nearly every add-on or utility designed for these sims. This note isn't to flame or judge you or your ideas...I do admire your belief that you would not intentionally be dishonest. I'm simply making an obsevation of the grey areas. =) Best Regards, Marc Marc J. Nelson Sim Racing News - USA

<snip> : Of course he deserves acknowledgement for his work. But when we're going : this way, we're going just the same way as the total Internet is going: : commercialisation & grief. If that's the way we want to go, I have nothing : left to say. That's the real frightening part. I remember when the internet was "almost" free of all the commerical garbage we now have to wade through each moment on the net. I remember the great "free" spirit of programs, patches, utilities for linux. When Win95 first came out most of the best utilities were provided in the same manner, sharing for "free" in the old community spirit of the internet. Guess, I'm just getting old. ;-) -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Again I must say this is nonsense, a paranoid fantasy. Look at Quake. I can buy commercial addon levels at the store. And yet that hasn't stopped the proliferation of free addons I can download from the net. If you really wanted to promote sharing I'd reccomend getting on Papyrus/Sierra's back for not using open standards and encouraging addons the way ID does. That would be far more beneficial than criticizing those who have managed to create something useful despite Papyrus' opposition to addons for their sims. Joe

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>I know I have no pirated software at all on my hard-drive as a matter >>of principle. >IMO it's difficult to make a statement like yours, without drawing >some sort of boundries for what is black, white, and what's a grey >area. It's akin to making a statement that "I'm totally honest", or >perhaps "I have never sinned", all with the added tag of "it's a >matter of principle."

Well, no it's not the same really. *Everyone* has lied some time, or sinned sometime. But I can assure you that the absolute quantity of pirated software on my computer is zero. None. Nothing grey about that. Joe

Michael Carver has perfectly described what bothers me, what I fear. See my post, "Final word on the ICR2 -> N2 Track Converter, I *hope*..." on more about the subject. Mark SimSpeed [link lost in import]

>You're just totally wrong here. In the long run you have a community in >which everyone tries try do their best to help others etc. etc., *or* you >have a community in which everyone asks money and helping others just to >help will be gone, far gone. Utter nonsense. There is no logic or factual evidence to support this fantasy that the two are mutually exclusive. Joe

>Please correct me if I've got this wrong, but by that rational you are >stating that the effort Dave put to create this converter must exceed any >effort which has gone before, since he is the only one asking payment. No, I'm stating that he felt the effort he put into it had enough value to warrant some form of payment. What's that got to do with anything? I know emergency services volunteers who put tememendous effort, with no pay, into their work. Does that mean professional firemen and policemen shouldn't be paid? Joe

>I only point this out because I think the bastard lives in all of us, given >the proper rationalization. I wonder how many are posting anti-pirate >diatribes with clean Hard drives. I know I have no pirated software at all on my hard-drive as a matter of principle. I was in the store the other day buying a full-registered Quake and some guy came up to me and told me he could crack open the shareware cd for me, no charge. Sure I was tempted - and to that extent I agree that "the bastard lives in all of us". But whether we let that bastard out or not is entirely up to us - and so I went to the cashier and paid for Quake. Joe

>If you really wanted to promote sharing I'd reccomend getting on >Papyrus/Sierra's back for not using open standards and encouraging >addons the way ID does. That would be far more beneficial than >criticizing those who have managed to create something useful despite >Papyrus' opposition to addons for their sims. Is Papyrus objection to addons for their sims, or theft of their intellectual property? I haven't seen an instance of the former except when the latter was the real issue... ---Jim Sokoloff

Well, I agree with this. But in many ways it still provides the same things. I think my Quake analogy is valid. As we speak I'm downloading about 10 MBs of free Quake levels (which I'll play on GLQuake on the 3dfx <g>). This despite the fact that commercial levels are also avialable. In fact, I'd argue that since there's some possibility of making a profit in Quake design skills - if you can get to a high enough quality level in game design - causes in general a more active development of addons, both free and commercial. Nothing generates more activity in an art form than the mere *possibility* of making some bucks if you get really good. Joe

(Joe) Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 23:09:05 GMT Message-ID: Again I must say this is nonsense, a paranoid fantasy. Look at Quake. I can buy commercial addon levels at the store. And yet that hasn't stopped the proliferation of free addons I can download from the net. If you really wanted to promote sharing I'd reccomend getting on Papyrus/Sierra's back for not using open standards and encouraging addons the way ID does. That would be far more beneficial than criticizing those who have managed to create something useful despite Papyrus' opposition to addons for their sims. Joe < I don't know if this will be a company-wide trend, but Sierra recently made the change to encouraging third party programs enhancing their football games (not that people weren't doing that already...) and also according to their website plan the same thing with the upcoming release of their baseball game. Who knows, their racing sims could possibly be next. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- Jason Nichols-Commissioner SportSim Football League: http://www.shreve.net/~taylorj/Football/ SSFL Information Center: http://members.aol.com/jn141414/ssfl.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------

I was told by Papyrus that if a track add-on was made available, that it would be at "little, or no-charge to the user." Best Regards, Marc Marc J. Nelson Sim Racing News - USA

: >That's the real frightening part. I remember when the internet was : >"almost" free of all the commerical garbage we now have to wade through : >each moment on the net. I remember the great "free" spirit of programs, : >patches, utilities for linux. When Win95 first came out most of the : >best utilities were provided in the same manner, sharing for "free" in : >the old community spirit of the internet. Guess, I'm just getting old. : >;-) : Again I must say this is nonsense, a paranoid fantasy. Look at Quake. : I can buy commercial addon levels at the store. And yet that hasn't : stopped the proliferation of free addons I can download from the net. : If you really wanted to promote sharing I'd reccomend getting on : Papyrus/Sierra's back for not using open standards and encouraging : addons the way ID does. That would be far more beneficial than : criticizing those who have managed to create something useful despite : Papyrus' opposition to addons for their sims. Oh my god, David Noonan is more than likely sitting back laughing his head off. Now whether this is from amu***t at all of this "bickering" that is now spewing forth in r.a.s. or out of pure hysteria, I don't know. I don't give a damn whether anybody charges for anything or if everything is free or whether there is an even mix of both. However, one has to be blind not see a difference between the net as it is now and the way it was 8 (even 2 years ago). I'm not even making a value judgement. I'm just stating fact. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

: In fact, I'd argue that since there's some possibility of making a : profit in Quake design skills - if you can get to a high enough : quality level in game design - causes in general a more active : development of addons, both free and commercial. Nothing generates : more activity in an art form than the mere *possibility* of making : some bucks if you get really good. I don't know if this is always true. While I agree that it is nice to be compensated for ones efforts, that isn't the real reward. Especially when you are talking about "art". The mere "creation" is the real reward. I am thinking about the linux community and how a whole port of the complex unix system was made to the pc by people who worked together and shared their knowledge openly. And to the best of my knowledge all of this work was done for free. I am totally blown away when I think of the man hours and hard labor put into the linux project. Yeh some people made some money off of it. Selling CD-Rom versions and books. But the people who made it happen and are still working on it are doing it for nothing but "love" and the satisfaction of a job well done. Anything else that comes their way is just gravy! Real art is generated by the heart, not the wallet. We are all familiar with the "starving artist"! ;-) -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Leech? > Who's the "leech" here? > This guy has taken liberties with someone else's product and is now trying > to make money out of it!! > What he has done, in the eyes of the law, is no different to what Microsoft > did when they had their knuckles legally caned for including "Defrag" and > "Scandisk" with DOS v6.2. > And we all know how quickly DOS v6.22 came out after the court case!! > -- > Bruce. > "But that was then....and this is now!" > (Guess who!)

Hmm and all that Topspeed ***in the stores isn't the same. Dave's util is much better than the ***in that Topspeed util kit. They stold people's util and sold them and people bought that without hesitation. Hey go make all new tracks for Grand Prix 2 with better details than the orginals and give them away for free. Bet you didn't like that FOR FREE part did you? -- "To all you villans out there I say, knock off all that evil!" -The Tick The Rusty Wallace Miller Lite stock car, awsome when opened up! GO#2! Mullins Motorsports Inc. http://www.***tron.com/~ddmj

Hi Jim, By "objection to addons" I just meant their failure to provide track and car file formats and specs, the way ID does for their games. Apparently ID even has interfaces to C compilers to generate truly original software with the Quake engine. I wouldn't be surprised if ID's long range plan is to extend their engine to eventally be the core of many different types of games, not just "Quake like". (As one example, there's an Enterprise NCC 1701-D map you can download that features many Star Trek like effects, including working transporters, turbolifts, etc.) ID's been making a FORTUNE with the "open" philosophy for years, ever since the original Doom. When a racing sim developer is finally going to see the light and cash in I cannot tell you. Joe

(snip) Nothing generates Standing alone, your last statement is true. However, in the context to the statements preceding it, it is more than false. More art is created for pleasure with no thought of financial gain than is ever created with an eye toward remuneration. That's a fact. Hobbyist? I can assure you that commercial success and financial independence are NOT the prerequisites for the making of viable art. In fact, in some genres commercialization is the art of Business only. Look at recording artists, now there's a fully funded genre inhabitated by a great many "artists" who couldn't play or write a song to save their lives. Who hasn't walked into a nightclub and walked out saying, "Man, why are these guys playing this dive?" This goes for any discipline. There are programmers out there , hobbyists by your definition, who can code the pants off a great many published Developers. I see no connection between the creation of art and money, short the tools to accomplish it. Real value isn't getting paid for it. It's a smile, a thank you , applause. If the motivation to create art is from monetary gain then I submit that the art made from such an onus belongs in the art of "business". regards,] greg Gavel

Quoted text (7 lines)

>: In fact, I'd argue that since there's some possibility of making a >: profit in Quake design skills - if you can get to a high enough >: quality level in game design - causes in general a more active >: development of addons, both free and commercial. Nothing generates >: more activity in an art form than the mere *possibility* of making >: some bucks if you get really good. >I don't know if this is always true.

That the possibility of money motivates people? I think that's one of the few things in this world that we can assume IS always true. ;-) Sure but people gotta eat and have shelter. If you can't make money the art form necesarily stays in the hobbyist realm, because no one can fully dedicate themselves to it. True, but as I say even the "starving artist" must eat sometime. In fact this is a big reason there are so few artists in general in North America, because there are so many people who do not believe that art is something worth paying for, something with real value. Joe

>I don't know if this will be a company-wide trend, but Sierra recently >made the change to encouraging third party programs enhancing their >football games (not that people weren't doing that already...) and also >according to their website plan the same thing with the upcoming release >of their baseball game. Who knows, their racing sims could possibly be >next. That's a good trend. But WRT racing sims I'll have to say IBIWISI (I'll believe it when I see it). Sim developers have traditionally been so slow to embrace new technology and ideas, I expect them to be one of the last genres to adopt the "open" attitude and way of doing business. Joe

(Joe) Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 19:11:55 GMT Message-ID: >I don't know if this will be a company-wide trend, but Sierra recently >made the change to encouraging third party programs enhancing their >football games (not that people weren't doing that already...) and also >according to their website plan the same thing with the upcoming release >of their baseball game. Who knows, their racing sims could possibly be >next. That's a good trend. But WRT racing sims I'll have to say IBIWISI (I'll believe it when I see it). Sim developers have traditionally been so slow to embrace new technology and ideas, I expect them to be one of the last genres to adopt the "open" attitude and way of doing business. Joe < You are right about them being slow to do that. They basically stopped all internal improvement of their football sim for like 2-3 years while hackers where eventually able to decipher their code and make independant improvements to the sim. Now for whatever reason they are taking the opposite approach and encouraging third party utilities for their football sim and are making their upcoming baseball sim "very configurable" through the use of an .INI file. I say it's a great trend for Sierra after far too long going in the opposite direction. I said a few months back that eventually $ierra would have a negative effect on Papy, now I can only say if Sierra's recent changes are a positive trend then maybe the positive effect will make it to Papy in the same manner. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- Jason Nichols-Commissioner SportSim Football League: http://www.shreve.net/~taylorj/Football/ SSFL Information Center: http://members.aol.com/jn141414/ssfl.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------

Except flight sims...they seem to 'see' the light. Marc

Nicely put, Gavel. Let he who is without the un-registered copy of pkunzip cast the first stone!

Quoted text (9 lines)

> If a copy of Daytona was esconced somewhere on the net, free for the > grabbing but for conscience sake, I suspect the silence would be deafening, > the strident cries of "for shame" would be drowned by hypocritical glee.:) > I only point this out because I think the bastard lives in all of us, given > the proper rationalization. I wonder how many are posting anti-pirate > diatribes with clean Hard drives. > Charge what you wish, Dave. I wish you well. > regards, > Gavel...track fodder in leagues everywhere! Someone has to come in 15th!!

>Well, no it's not the same really. *Everyone* has lied some time, or >sinned sometime. But I can assure you that the absolute quantity of >pirated software on my computer is zero. None. Nothing grey about >that. So you don't have the shareware PaintShop Pro then? You have registered PKunzip/Winzip, registered SDD/UniVBE? How about your e-mail and usenet software, are they registered shareware? Life is not black and white, and I am highly confident that I could find _something_ illegal about anyone's system, however small. Marc was simply making a salient point - not arguing with you. I'm doing that :-) Cheers! John

>Again I must say this is nonsense, a paranoid fantasy. Look at Quake. >I can buy commercial addon levels at the store. And yet that hasn't >stopped the proliferation of free addons I can download from the net. Joe, one more time. Go and READ the N2 license and what it prohibits - READ the Quake license and what it allows. You'll notice Quake was especially written with an open architecture with precisely that in mind. N2 and ICR2 did not apply that ethos. Cheers! John

SHANE: R: Like it wans't a money hungry world for over a 1000 years. It's nice that us average people can make a few bucks now and then. Be thankful were not slaves. Q.B.M.

Quoted text (12 lines)

>> More art is created for pleasure with no thought of financial gain >>than is ever created with an eye toward remuneration. That's a fact. >Utter and complete bullocks. Do you have any idea how much effort goes >into creating a truly high quality piece of art? How many novels would >be written if no novelist could work full time on their novel? How >many great paintings if all the painters had to work 9-5 on other jobs >and could only spend an hour or two a day on painting? What you state >is not a fact at all, it is completely contrary to all abservable >facts, as well as common sense - the quality (and the quantity) of art >produced suffers tremendously if the artist has to spend 40 hours a >week working on something *other* than their art.

In the genre of music, where I reside, most great "works" were written long before the hit album, the "commissioning" of , or the safety of a tenured station. As far as high quality, if your only measurement of it is by commercial success, then Kurt Cobain surely is the artist and a 5 year old Mozart was not. Quality of art is not based upon it's ability to support one. At five, I hardly think Wolfgang was***ing his lips at the pay. As far as time invested to create a great piece of art. It can be a lifetime or brief second of inspiration. While practice does indeed make perfect, one doesn't necessarily follow the other. There are plenty of Computer programs with highly paid programmers that stink. There are plenty of first efforts that are regarded as classics. Where is this definition of an artist you cite? There was art before there was money. There will be art when there is no money. The violinist alone in her room playing for herself is an artist and is creating art. The making of Outpost, a commonly accepted piece of garbage, is by your definition art!? I submit that if the utilities coded and offered here were boxed nice and pretty and had a software developers label on them you couldn't tell them from shinola. Quantity, yes. Quality? Naw. There are more obscure great artistic works in this world than just what is on the merchants' shelves. No connection, in context, means art is art irregardless of money's influence. The motivation has everything to do with it as it was you who, in the post I responded to, claimed that nothing motivates the creation of art more than the possibility of getting paid for it. I sure can't agree with this definition of an artist. I work forty hours per week. I write music, I play it. I don't live off of it. But I can tell you this; I'm a far better musician than many who do live off of it. And I am not an artist? regards, Greg Gavel

> Standing alone, your last statement is true. However, in the context >to the statements preceding it, it is more than false. > More art is created for pleasure with no thought of financial gain >than is ever created with an eye toward remuneration. That's a fact. Utter and complete bullocks. Do you have any idea how much effort goes into creating a truly high quality piece of art? How many novels would be written if no novelist could work full time on their novel? How many great paintings if all the painters had to work 9-5 on other jobs and could only spend an hour or two a day on painting? What you state is not a fact at all, it is completely contrary to all abservable facts, as well as common sense - the quality (and the quantity) of art produced suffers tremendously if the artist has to spend 40 hours a week working on something *other* than their art. Yes they are. By definition anyone who can only spend a tiny percentage of their efforts and time on an endeaver is a hobbyist. I don't believe this for a second. It is simply not true, and there is no evidence or logic at all to support it at all. Your claim is almost farcical on the face of it. Then you are utterly blind. How can there POSSIBLY be "no connection" between being able to fully devote yourself to art and the quality and quantity or art produced? Obviously, by definition in fact, your art suffers if you can only devote 5% of your energy and time towards it. The *motivation* has nothing to do with it - what we are talking about is the practical reality of living and working in the world. An artist has to be able to make a living off their art or they are not an artist, they're just a hobbyist. Joe

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>Again I must say this is nonsense, a paranoid fantasy. Look at Quake. >>I can buy commercial addon levels at the store. And yet that hasn't >>stopped the proliferation of free addons I can download from the net. >Go and READ the N2 license and what it prohibits - READ the Quake >license and what it allows. You'll notice Quake was especially written >with an open architecture with precisely that in mind. >N2 and ICR2 did not apply that ethos.

I never said otherwise. Someone was claiming that the availbility of fo-pay addons will reduce the availability of free ones. Quake shows that nothing could be further from the truth - a healthy addon community develops large quantities of both. That fact that Papyrus is a much more close-minded company than ID is completely beside the point. Joe

>Go and READ the N2 license and what it prohibits - READ the Quake >license and what it allows. You'll notice Quake was especially written >with an open architecture with precisely that in mind. Shrinkwrap licenses haven't proven to be legally binding. Just because you include a piece of paper in the box with a piece of software, or force someone to click "yes" in a dialog box before a program installs, does not necessarily mean that that person is legally bound by the text found there. Neither Sierra nor id nor any other software company has the power to write or enforce laws, and there's a very serious problem with the concept of agreeing to something that you couldn't even see until after you'd handed over your money. (Almost all software licenses say "if you don't agree you can return this to the store for a full refund." Tell that to the manager at Best Buy or some other slimy No Returns On Software store and see how well it works.) The Quake license (which may or may not be legally binding) goes something like this: "You may not make illegal copies of this program" (unnecessary; this is covered by copyright law) "no warranty; if there's a bug, you can't have your money back, and if this program blows up your computer, we don't owe you anything" (standard software company disclaimer boilerplate, maybe worth something in court, maybe not) "you may make all the mods you want, as long as they're free and they only work with the commercial version not the free one (this is the open part)", "if you want to charge for your mods, or run a pay server, you have to contact us and hand over some money" (and this isn't) "the NiN logos are owned by someone else not id so we can't let you use them so don't." The only real difference between id's license and everyone else's is that id specificially allows not-for-profit mods. Very cool of them, but they're granting you a right that you probably already had. Does Papyrus or Sierra have the right to tell you not to distribute original or modified versions of their code? Damn straight they do. It's their code, and they have copyright on it. Do they have a right to tell you not to distribute your own original program that modifies their code? I sincerely doubt it, regardless of what their (probably legally worthless) shrink-wrap license says. But I'm not a lawyer, just some guy who's read the copyright FAQ and browsed through the US Code on the web. (I better stop before I start talking about how you have just as much right to mention the Daytona Motor Speedway in your computer game as the newspapers have to mention it in an article the day after the race. You can copyright specific pictures, and text, and code, but not facts like the length of a straightaway. You can trademark names, and logos, but you can't keep other people from mentioning your trademarks as long as they're acknowledged and not intended to defraud by passing off their product as yours.) The rights of the holders of intellectual property are strictly defined, and they're not infinite, but of course they won't tell you that. Software license agreement: By having read this far, you owe me $100. :-> -- spamgard(tm): To email me, put "geek" in your Subject line.

>So you don't have the shareware PaintShop Pro then? Nope. I use Screen Thief for screen captures, registered. Yup. Don't have it or use it as far as I know. Yup. True. Something they've inadvertandly put on and forgot about maybe - which is not quite the same thing we were talking about, which is knowing theft. This isn't an argument - it's just contradiction! ;-) Joe

: I never said otherwise. Someone was claiming that the availbility of : fo-pay addons will reduce the availability of free ones. Quake shows : that nothing could be further from the truth - a healthy addon : community develops large quantities of both. That fact that Papyrus is : a much more close-minded company than ID is completely beside the : point. I don't think it so much that Papyrus is a "close-minded" company, it's more the approach they took to creating their sims. ID had a completely different approach. ID wanted to make the engine first. The engine would be their bread and butter. And yes they intentionally made the engine "open". On the other hand I believe that Papyrus wanted to make a racing simulation and built the engine(s) as they developed the simulation. Now the big question is, do you want Papyrus to spend a Large amount of resources (money & man hours), to reverse engineer their complicated engines, just to make it "open"? One more thing you seem to be overlooking, when Quake becomes a complicated simulation (ala NASCAR2, ICR2), then your arguement will carry more weight. Until then, it is a rather weak defense. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

> a tenured station. As far as high quality, if your only measurement of it >is by commercial success, then Kurt Cobain surely is the artist and a 5 >year old Mozart was not. As usual, you miss the point completely. You are creating a "straw man" to argue against, instead of arguing with what I actually said. Don't be an idiot. No novel was ever written in a "second". Nor any great painting or song. (How long the "inspiration" takes is another completely different point of course, and again you totally miss the point.) In the dictionary - try looking up the word professional: someone paid for their work. A hobbyist is an unpaid part-timer. This is completely irrelavent to the argument and to anything that happens in todays world, since everyone in this world needs money to live. And again has nothing to do with my points, which you conveniently ignore. Oh, when exactly will there be "no money"? Don't be an idiot. Most of the "utilities" are painted car sets, which no one would pay for. The games themselves, of course, could NOT be and WERE not created by amateurs. You just keep repeating the same blithering nonsense over and over with no argument, no examples to support your case, and no refutation of my points. In short, you've lost this debate because you refuse to actually take part in it. No, you are not an artist, period. You are a music hobbyist. Joe

Quoted text (15 lines)

>: I never said otherwise. Someone was claiming that the availbility of >: fo-pay addons will reduce the availability of free ones. Quake shows >: that nothing could be further from the truth - a healthy addon >: community develops large quantities of both. That fact that Papyrus is >: a much more close-minded company than ID is completely beside the >: point. >I don't think it so much that Papyrus is a "close-minded" company, it's >more the approach they took to creating their sims. ID had a completely >different approach. ID wanted to make the engine first. The engine >would be their bread and butter. And yes they intentionally made the >engine "open". On the other hand I believe that Papyrus wanted to make >a racing simulation and built the engine(s) as they developed the >simulation. Now the big question is, do you want Papyrus to spend a >Large amount of resources (money & man hours), to reverse engineer their >complicated engines, just to make it "open"?

You haven't refuted my point in any way. You seem to be arguing for my point, in fact, that Papyrus is indeed a close minded company. Or are you suggesting that they are an open-minded company that simply happens to design and implement their products with a close-minded approach and strategy? I fail to see the distinction. But this is no argument at all. You are theorizing that somehow the complexity of a racing sim makes an open-architecture approach difficult or impossible, but you've presented no evidence for this case. It is your defense of Papryrus closed-architecture strategy that is weak - I see no justification for the strategy at all except close-mindedness. Joe

>> a tenured station. As far as high quality, if your only measurement of it >>is by commercial success, then Kurt Cobain surely is the artist and a 5 >>year old Mozart was not. >As usual, you miss the point completely. You are creating a "straw >man" to argue against, instead of arguing with what I actually said. Address the issue, Joe, instead hiding behind your vague "miss the point" jibes. You stated that ..by definition" one who doesn't live off of their art is a hobbyist. I pointed out that Mozart could have hardly supported himself at five years old yet he was considered an artist. Kurt Cobain, on the other hand is by your definition an artist merely by reason of his full time employment in the field. That WAS the point and THE issue. Not every novel written was written by a full time employed writer. That is a fact. So your idea that art can only be created by artists,and not hobbyists is again laid to rest. I asked for your definition of Artist. I quoted your argument in the last post. Unfortunately, you haven't the sense to remember or read what you posted. You clearly state that by definition no one is an artist unless they live off of their art. Non sequitur evasion, Joe. Of course you know this for a fact. You are privy to the hiring records of alll major artistic entities!? You don't know know if Mr. X was hired the day before to help code Nascar2, do you? Of course,according to your faulty logic, Mr. X was,the day before his employment, a hobbyist. He magically became an artist when he became gainfully employed in coding. Letr me ask you, do you buy your Hamburger from that artistic institute called Wimpys? Or do you struggle with your hobbyist attempts at cooking a burger? Art is Art, Joe. Wheteher you live off of it or not it IS ART. And you're so full of yourself, you can't respond with anything other than out of context blather and vague "missed the point" statements.The last line of your post quoted here sums up your points. If you can't remember to check what you wrote in previous posts then don't waste my time by rearranging context to suit your arrogant demeanor. Right. You keep believin that. Arrogant ass!!

Hi all, My apologies that this discussion went on so long and stepped outside the realm and scope of this newsgroup. Thanks for your patience. And by the way...Mr.Lingenberg, you are an artist, same for Carver, Johns, Frederick, Alex, Noonan, Busch, Heath, Sokoloff, Gary, Jed, any one who ever used their brain creatively to make the sims we use a little better. Oh yeah, Mozart too. Any further posts, I expect flames shortly, on the subject will be handled through e-mail though I consider the subject dead as far as my involvement. Oh, a last thing. There is a new newsgroup on TEN dedicated to Nascar2. You all might find it a bit amusing. Regards, Gavel

<snip> : You haven't refuted my point in any way. You seem to be arguing for my Wasn't trying to... <snip> : But this is no argument at all. You are theorizing that somehow the Wasn't arguing either... Never mind.... -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

It's not even a good one. Do the damn thing right and it might be worth paying for.

Do you think so?! Can we have separate lawyers please..... Just because you decide to click "yes" without reading what it is you're putting your name to, doesn't absolve you from the responsibilities you've just taken on. Ignorance is not an excuse, and laziness doesn't count either. The only safety net you have is that there are too many people out there to prosecute, but should you draw attention to yourself (say, for example, by selling something gained by breaking the license agreement), you haven't a legal leg to stand on. Exactly, and most other licenses don't - including Papy's. Of course not, Dave isn't the one breaking the law here, it's all the people _using_ the program - they're the people who are breaking the law. Cheers! John PS - Reading this far absolves me of all responsibility to pay $100, and further requires that $100 be paid in compensation to cover administrative costs.

>I never said otherwise. Someone was claiming that the availbility of >fo-pay addons will reduce the availability of free ones. Quake shows >that nothing could be further from the truth - a healthy addon >community develops large quantities of both. That fact that Papyrus is >a much more close-minded company than ID is completely beside the >point. Closed minded has nothing to do with it. Quake levels do not generally represented copyrighted entities in the real world, whereas anything made in a NASCAR2 track editor probably would, to say nothing of encouraging the swapping of complete track files (how many people can write a conversion program) and reducing track pack potential sales.

>>, registered SDD/UniVBE? >Don't have it or use it as far as I know. "As far as you know"? Better check out that possible infringement there.... :-) Theft is theft. Try telling the judge that you'd "forgotten it was there". It's a discussion - no-one's spiralled into an argument yet! Cheers! John

> Not every novel written was written by a full time employed writer. 98% of them are. Once again you try to create a straw-man argument that has NOTHING whatsoever to do with what I said. OK: Someone with the guts and conviction to devote their energies to their art (hint: this is not you). IOW, someone who's art is their career - which applies to both Mozart and Kurt Cobain, but not to you. Bullshit - you made up a strawman argument in your own mind and "quoted" that. GMAFB - by your definition EVERYONE is an artist, and the word "artist" ceases to have any meaning whatsoever. It is an insult to real, dedicated artists everywhere. You don't have the GUTS to be a real artist, but you like the idea of calling yourself one. Pathetic. Joe

>Closed minded has nothing to do with it. Quake levels do not generally >represented copyrighted entities in the real world Not true. Just the other day I downloaded a Quake level of the starship Enterprise NCC-1701D, which I'm sure is material copyrighted by Paramount. Says who? People could make tracks of whatever they want. And if they make a track that invringes on someones copyright, that obviously does not affect Papyrus at all - it is an issue between the copyright holder and the track creator. And here we finally get to the real issue - the idea that a closed program can generate more income through potential (but highly limited) addon sales is PRECISELY the "close-minded" thinking I was talking about. It is the old-fashioned software sales model, one that Doom and Quake have proven is utterly invalid. ID has gained FAR, FAR more income and sales from the open-architecture approach than they ever could have by locking everyone else out of the addon business. I would have thought this was obvious to anyone by now, but yout post - not to metion the persistent close-mindedness of sim companies like Papryus - shows that this is not the case. To me it's as obvious as the nose on my face, but for some reason people just can't understand the ID business model and why it makes them so successful. Joe

>>Shrinkwrap licenses haven't proven to be legally binding. Just >>because you include a piece of paper in the box with a piece of >>software, or force someone to click "yes" in a dialog box before >>a program installs, does not necessarily mean that that person is >>legally bound by the text found there. >Do you think so?! Can we have separate lawyers please..... Absolutely - the license doesn't mean nothing, but there are distinct limits on what it can enfore. For example, the courts have decided that it is "fair use" to make a backup archive copy of software CDs, even if the license agreement explicitly prohibits it. Joe

>>>Shrinkwrap licenses haven't proven to be legally binding. Just >>>because you include a piece of paper in the box with a piece of >>>software, or force someone to click "yes" in a dialog box before >>>a program installs, does not necessarily mean that that person is >>>legally bound by the text found there. >. ....................etc This thread is deadlocked. Give it up. Personally, being a programmer, I see nothing wrong with reading one file format and converting to be used in a later version of the same prgram. Indycar, ICR2, Nascar, Nascar2 all being written by the same company and programmers and generally using the same physics modeling code. If Papyrus had been Microsoft or Borland, etc,,,, backwards compatibilty would have been included in the base package anyway. And that's the way it should be. Just because you change Word versions doesn't mean you throw out all your earlier Word documents and start over again. So more power to him. Just food for thought. (less than 2 cents worth.) No insults intended.

>OK: Someone with the guts and conviction to devote their energies to >their art (hint: this is not you). IOW, someone who's art is their >career - which applies to both Mozart and Kurt Cobain, but not to you. An artist is anyone good at OR given to a particular activity, hence booze artist,***artist etc. The fact that someone isn't particularly good doesn't mean they're not an artist. There is no implication of time or energy devoted to it either. If someone writes music, they're an artist. Em....he's right you know. An artist by your definition is one particular form of artist, but everyone is an artist in one form or another. Arguing whether someone is or isn't is attempting to make black and white of something which isn't. Cheers! John

>Absolutely - the license doesn't mean nothing, but there are distinct >limits on what it can enfore. For example, the courts have decided >that it is "fair use" to make a backup archive copy of software CDs, >even if the license agreement explicitly prohibits it. And this relates to what we were talking about...how?

>>Closed minded has nothing to do with it. Quake levels do not generally >>represented copyrighted entities in the real world >Not true. Just the other day I downloaded a Quake level of the >starship Enterprise NCC-1701D, which I'm sure is material copyrighted >by Paramount. Do you see the word "generally" in my post? So that's one, if he were to sell it commercially I'm sure Paramount would be interested. It doesn't matter if it affects Papyrus or not. It infringes their license sure, it also affects Daytona's, Indy's, whoever's track you've copied. The fact is a license is infringed and if you're profiting from that it is seen as taking a slice of their action. They're more likely to want a slice of something than a slice of nothing. Joe, you've finally lost it. NO-ONE is arguing against that, it is perfectly straightforward logic. The point you neglected to address is that ID can do that because they have no copyright issues at all. They make an open architecture, release it, and if some level artist makes a copyrighted entity, hey, he's on his own. In Papyrus case the vast majority of things people will make will be copyrighted, and it may even be a part of the license with the tracks that there isn't an editor. It could also be that they don't have time, don't see money in it, find the process too complex or a million other things. Monster Truck Madness has an open architecture, as does POD - I don't see them taking over the world. Cheers! John

Quoted text (15 lines)

> Hi all, > My apologies that this discussion went on so long and stepped outside the > realm and scope of this newsgroup. Thanks for your patience. > And by the way...Mr.Lingenberg, you are an artist, same for Carver, Johns, > Frederick, Alex, Noonan, Busch, Heath, Sokoloff, Gary, Jed, any one who ever > used their brain creatively to make the sims we use a little better. Oh yeah, > Mozart too. > Any further posts, I expect flames shortly, on the subject will be handled > through e-mail though I consider the subject dead as far as my involvement. > Oh, a last thing. There is a new newsgroup on TEN dedicated to Nascar2. > You all might find it a bit amusing. > Regards, > Gavel

Hey, you forgot to mention me :) I use my brain (99% of the time) to make the Sim community we are little better. Like Micheal E.Carver, ccorpora, Eric T.Busch, etc. I think I don't have the respect I should deserve on r.a.s. AND in the Simracing community. Gavel, you are a great guy and I hope you best luck. and the TEN nascar2 is really cool :) Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) SPEED- Cars, WC, BGN, Trucks, IROC, utilities and more... SPEED- http://www.sim-speed.com/ |! Go Rubens Barrichello, Jacques Villeneuve, !| |! Patrick Carpentier,Jeff Gordon and Greg Moore!!! !| |! May the force be with you, always!! !| |! Que la force soit avec toi, jamais!! !| |! Excuse me for my poor English (I'm French speaking) !| Flight Cadet Nien Numb, Gold squadron http://www.dpliv.com/dragon/Gold/index.html May the force be with you, always!!

Quoted text (9 lines)

|! Official French r.a.s.s.m. Cool guy !| |! Official French r.a.s. cool guy !| |! Official Star Wars geek fan !| |! Official Anti-trekkies SW *** !| |! Official Jedi Master of NSWL !| |! Official SW Gonk religion fan !| |! #1 rec.autos.simulator post writer !| |! Best French SimRacer on the 'net !| |! Official Annoying long signature guy (thanks Eric!) !|