Just as folks know that at some point when the all the jobs have left the U.S. that Americans won't be able to aford the goods and services that were once made here and now produced overseas.
It appears from the whois info and the court filing that this group was set up for the express purpose of the law suit. If you actually read the filing, you might have noticed some contact information:
Felstein & Associates, P.A Attorneys for EMarketersAmerica.org, Inc. 555 South Federal Highway, Suite 450 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 (561) 367-7990 Phone (561) 367-7980 Fax mark@EMarketersAmericia.org Mark E. Felstein, Esq. FBN: 192139
And thanks to google (search on address), from their web site:
www.robertcstone.com Robert C. Stone, P.A. 555 South Federal Highway, Suite 450 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Telephone: 561-338-4844 Toll Free: 888-206-2022 rstone4173@aol.com
I just spoke with Mr. Stone on the phone and that is the correct place to contact Mr. Felstein.
Does anyone know if rstone@robertcstone.com is a valid email contact?
I just wish RCN would come to my town north of Boston. The nearest RCN
is two towns away. If and when they get here, I'd
happily drop AT, even if it isn't at 3Mbps.
The deal that the retailer has with the publisher is irrelevant to this discussion.
Yes, you have all the rights granted to you in your area by law, first sale, fair use and such.
Yes, you can even resell it. Remember, not all EULA are simple click thur by uninformed end users.
If I decide that I don't like the EULA, I'm not bound by it.
If you don't like the EULA, you aren't bound by it? If you don't like the EULA doesn't matter a hoot. If the EULA is enforceable in court is what matters.
Your logic is flawed.
I agree that Win32 apps aren't derivative works, but your analogy (comparing the game to an OS) is flawed (I think).
The NWN game is a game, protected by copyright. The world building utilities, although slightly different are also protected by copyright.
But I agree, their output, the mods, should not be considered derivative works. I was only pointing out that because of the nature of the beast,
NWN might try to claim ownership (as a copyrighted derivative work) because the mod may in some ways contain material that is copyrighted by WotC.
Hummm... claim ownership is incorrect, they may try to restrict you from material gain for your mod.
But you didn't "buy" the product, the company is only selling you a license to use the software.
There is a fine line between License agreements, buying a product and copyright law.
When you "buy" NWN, you are getting the binaries on the CD and the right to use that software. Bioware can try to enforce certain restrictions on that use, but they may overstep or overstate their "rights". Usually, this will take a court to decide.
Anway, you can't take their existing software, modify it and resell it. Your work, while still your sweat and blood, is a derivative work and would be a violation of copyright. While a car isn't necessarily covered by copyright, software is.
However, if you "use" their software to create your own work, it is "your" work and I don't think that they can hijack it. I believe that they will have a hard time enforcing that part of the EULA. However (again), many of the in game items, the environment and such in your world are covered by WotC copyright on D&D. So, you might be able to distribute it for free, but they might try claiming that your work is a derivative of D&D.
I question the part of the EULA where Bioware "implies" that I assign my copyright rights to them exclusively for distribution at their option.
I suspect that the courts would strike that part of the EULA since there would not have been any "consideration" between the two parties, as the lawyers like to say.
This is the email I got recently about vanity hostnames:
Subject: Important Announcement About Vanity Hostnames Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:13:48 -0500 (CDT) From: Network Notifications To: NAME_REMOVED@ATTBI.COM
Important Announcement About Vanity Hostnames
Our records show that you have a vanity hostname (i.e., hostname other than h+MAC address) assigned to your account. While the ability to provision vanity hostnames was discontinued in November of 2001, any vanity hostname provisioned prior to then was migrated to the AT&T Broadband Internet network in the format vanityhostname.ne.client2.attbi.com.
Due to upcoming network changes, we will no longer officially support this service. Every effort will be made to continue to keep existing vanity hostnames active, but this cannot be guaranteed. This also means that we can no longer transfer an existing vanity hostname to a replacement Ethernet adapter. If you replace your Ethernet adapter, note that your new hostname will utilize the h+MAC address convention (defined below).
Our hostname policy is to set the hostname to the MAC (Media Access Control) address of your Ethernet adapter preceded by the letter "h". For example, if your Ethernet MAC address were 00:80:D7:3D:23:B0, your hostname would become h0080d73d23b0.ne.client2.attbi.com. We selected this hostname because the MAC address is unique, and because it is already discoverable on the Internet. We precede it with the letter "h" to avoid a completely numeric hostname, which is discouraged.
Persistent host names have never been officially supported on our network and should we need to renumber the network, we can make no guarantee as to the amount of time that will be needed for the hostname to resolve to an IP address.
Sincerely,
AT&T Broadband
This email is for informational purposes only. Please note that any forwarded emails will not be responded to.
Or... I paid $150 for my modem about 3 years ago at a savings of $10 a month.
I'm ahead of the game (after 15 months) but I'd still chuck it and change service to another cable internet provider if AT&T didn't have a monopoly in my town. I'm just waiting for RCN to move up my way.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Better yet,
Have IBM buy SCO just for the pleasure of firing them all.
I read this before it got properly moderated....
"exports and maintain cmdrtaco's dog rectum fetish"
That was worth a chuckle.
Sure, people knew it would happen.
Just as folks know that at some point when the all the jobs have left the U.S. that Americans won't be able to aford the goods and services that were once made here and now produced overseas.
Please tell us what this large scale software project is and the company you work for is?
So that we may stay away from it.
If the door is ajar and you enter, it's not B&E but Illegal entry and/or criminal trespass I believe.
"Locks are made to keep honest people honest"
It appears from the whois info and the court filing that this group was set up for the express purpose of the law suit. If you actually read the filing, you might have noticed some contact information:
Felstein & Associates, P.A
Attorneys for EMarketersAmerica.org, Inc.
555 South Federal Highway, Suite 450
Boca Raton, Florida 33432
(561) 367-7990 Phone
(561) 367-7980 Fax
mark@EMarketersAmericia.org
Mark E. Felstein, Esq.
FBN: 192139
And thanks to google (search on address), from their web site:
www.robertcstone.com
Robert C. Stone, P.A.
555 South Federal Highway, Suite 450
Boca Raton, Florida 33432
Telephone: 561-338-4844
Toll Free: 888-206-2022
rstone4173@aol.com
I just spoke with Mr. Stone on the phone and that is the correct place to contact Mr. Felstein.
Does anyone know if rstone@robertcstone.com is a valid email contact?
I just wish RCN would come to my town north of Boston. The nearest RCN is two towns away. If and when they get here, I'd happily drop AT, even if it isn't at 3Mbps.
The deal that the retailer has with the publisher is irrelevant to this discussion.
Yes, you have all the rights granted to you in your area by law, first sale, fair use and such. Yes, you can even resell it. Remember, not all EULA are simple click thur by uninformed end users.
If I decide that I don't like the EULA, I'm not bound by it.
If you don't like the EULA, you aren't bound by it? If you don't like the EULA doesn't matter a hoot. If the EULA is enforceable in court is what matters. Your logic is flawed.
I agree that Win32 apps aren't derivative works, but your analogy (comparing the game to an OS) is flawed (I think). The NWN game is a game, protected by copyright. The world building utilities, although slightly different are also protected by copyright. But I agree, their output, the mods, should not be considered derivative works. I was only pointing out that because of the nature of the beast, NWN might try to claim ownership (as a copyrighted derivative work) because the mod may in some ways contain material that is copyrighted by WotC. Hummm... claim ownership is incorrect, they may try to restrict you from material gain for your mod.
There is a fine line between License agreements, buying a product and copyright law.
When you "buy" NWN, you are getting the binaries on the CD and the right to use that software. Bioware can try to enforce certain restrictions on that use, but they may overstep or overstate their "rights". Usually, this will take a court to decide.
Anway, you can't take their existing software, modify it and resell it. Your work, while still your sweat and blood, is a derivative work and would be a violation of copyright. While a car isn't necessarily covered by copyright, software is.
However, if you "use" their software to create your own work, it is "your" work and I don't think that they can hijack it. I believe that they will have a hard time enforcing that part of the EULA. However (again), many of the in game items, the environment and such in your world are covered by WotC copyright on D&D. So, you might be able to distribute it for free, but they might try claiming that your work is a derivative of D&D.
Of course, IANAL
I question the part of the EULA where Bioware "implies" that I assign my copyright rights to them exclusively for distribution at their option.
I suspect that the courts would strike that part of the EULA since there would not have been any "consideration" between the two parties, as the lawyers like to say.
It will be interesting to see if a court upholds this EULA over the owners copyright rights.
This is the email I got recently about vanity hostnames:
Subject: Important Announcement About Vanity Hostnames
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:13:48 -0500 (CDT)
From: Network Notifications
To: NAME_REMOVED@ATTBI.COM
Important Announcement About Vanity Hostnames
Our records show that you have a vanity hostname (i.e., hostname
other than h+MAC address) assigned to your account. While the
ability to provision vanity hostnames was discontinued in November
of 2001, any vanity hostname provisioned prior to then was migrated
to the AT&T Broadband Internet network in the format
vanityhostname.ne.client2.attbi.com.
Due to upcoming network changes, we will no longer officially
support this service. Every effort will be made to continue to
keep existing vanity hostnames active, but this cannot be
guaranteed. This also means that we can no longer transfer an
existing vanity hostname to a replacement Ethernet adapter. If
you replace your Ethernet adapter, note that your new hostname
will utilize the h+MAC address convention (defined below).
Our hostname policy is to set the hostname to the MAC (Media
Access Control) address of your Ethernet adapter preceded by the
letter "h". For example, if your Ethernet MAC address were
00:80:D7:3D:23:B0, your hostname would become
h0080d73d23b0.ne.client2.attbi.com. We selected this hostname
because the MAC address is unique, and because it is already
discoverable on the Internet. We precede it with the letter "h"
to avoid a completely numeric hostname, which is discouraged.
Persistent host names have never been officially supported on our
network and should we need to renumber the network, we can make
no guarantee as to the amount of time that will be needed for the
hostname to resolve to an IP address.
Sincerely,
AT&T Broadband
This email is for informational purposes only. Please note that
any forwarded emails will not be responded to.
Copyright AT&T Broadband 2002
Or... I paid $150 for my modem about 3 years ago at a savings of $10 a month. I'm ahead of the game (after 15 months) but I'd still chuck it and change service to another cable internet provider if AT&T didn't have a monopoly in my town. I'm just waiting for RCN to move up my way. :-)
St. Charles, MO ?? (thanks google)
I was thinking of the pencil test :-)
Actually, it should be 2000 orders * (cost of card - $129) = ? I have a hard time believing the cards wholesale at $329 or more.