@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

Yes but the library is not, so where did it come from?

It was reimplmented from scratch as far as I know.
There is no dispute about the library only the headers and dcumentations.

You can believe if Piru thought his library src code had been used he would have made a bigger deal of it!

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@Massi

just dont try to make meta discussion out of everything you dont like to hear. thats "so what"..

Last edited by wawa on 19-Sep-2015 at 10:04 PM.

@broadblues

Quote:

broadblues wrote: @cdimauro Quote: They FIRST copied it. They? Who is they?

It was a generic talk. Of course, it was one person which did it.
Quote:

This isn't a monolithic situation, one person coppied the material, I'm guessing as part of teh same "time saving action" (yet still incorrect ofcourse) as the MUI4.

Time saving and OS4 is an oxymoron, looking at their biblical releases.
Quote:

Another person later included that contant in the SDK in error. An apology was issued and the documents replaced. (might have been the other way round time wise, it gets confusing...)

The documents should have been removed instead. You have to ASK to and OBTAIN a license from the copyright owner. An apology isn't enough to solve the problem.

Has Hyperion released a third SDK version WITHOUT such documents (even the modified ones, I mean)?
Quote:

Quote: Then, AFTER that Piru published his complaints, they copied AGAIN the same files rephrasing something, which WORSEN the things. Whether they coppied or rewrote is your opionion you have no evidenec on that,

We were/are talking about COPYright violation. They (because at this point other persons were informed of the misdeed) might have used their already modified versions, but they still used copied information, and subject to the copyright law.
Quote:

and whther worsened the situatin is also your opinion.

You can ask a judge, and see if it's an opinion or not.
Quote:

Quote: Those are the FACTs, and that's not a point of view. Only your fisrt FACT is a fact, all the rest of that is your opinion.

See above. You cannot avoid the copyright violation by simply rephrasing something. And this is the second fact...
Quote:

Quote: No, it wasn't a mistake, but a deliberate action. Including it in the SDK was mistake, ( I belive at any rate), copying was deliberate, though deliberate doesn't mean 'evil', rather misplaced expediency, the correct thng would have been to ask and credit.

And ask for a license, to be more precise.

However rephrasing something of the documents are a clear evidence of the evil conduct of the company, because at this point in time, as I stated before, they were already informed, and approved the new changes, which were, AGAIN, a violation of the copyright.
Quote:

Quote: That's the usual "Ad hominem" attack: a logical fallacy which is common for people which weren't able to rebut to something. Enough with the logical fallicies already, you uses them so much in your arguments, you are guilty of the fallicy fallicy !

It seems that attending too much with persons which fall with logic has a devastating effect to me. Maybe I've to make a break from this place.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Those are the FACTs, and that's not a point of view. Oh no not again... we had pretty long discussion about such your "facts".

So what?

If I've made some mistake you're free to correct me, like Andy did.
Quote:

In any case, error (you call it crime )

Only the first time. After that... errare humanum est, perseverare autem diabolicum!
Quote:

was corrected

See above my reply to Andy.
Quote:

and even MorphOS SDK was updated to reflect contributions from AROS. Good outcome, I think.

That's a different, since AROS has a "free" license (similar to LGPL): you were allowed to copy everything, but you've to report the copyright, the license, and bring back changes to the code.

The Piru's case is different: see above.

Anyway, see itix's comment.

Last edited by cdimauro on 19-Sep-2015 at 10:54 PM.

@cdimauro

Quote:

So what?

Nothing more than we both know so good.

Quote:

Only the first time.

If you think it was crime, contact Piru and persuade him to file legal complaint, or better (as you say it was crime) to contact police authorities in Belgium to prosecute Hyperion and its managers.

@Signal

Quote:

Signal wrote: @pavlor Quote: pavlor wrote: In any case, error (you call it crime ) was corrected and even MorphOS SDK was updated to reflect contributions from AROS. Good outcome, I think. Error, mistake, oversight.........etc. In order for a criminal act to take place, there has to be criminal intent.

And the "fix" clearly proved it...
Quote:

When Intel purposely modified the compiler to make AMDs chips use software to do math instead of the math unit that was intent. And they paid dearly for it.

You're wrong here. Intel's compiler only produced optimized code for her microarchitectures (I've underlined it, because it's important: see below also), and not even all of them (for obvious reasons).

The problem, which lead to the sentence, was that she didn't informed her customers of this fact. So, the compiled binaries only entered the generic 386 code-path if they ran on a processor which hadn't a supported microarchitecture. Pay attention that even some Intel processors entered this generic path, for the same reason.

Please, report correct information the next time.
Quote:

There was no intent here. The copyright was not replaced with another, the person working on the files forgot to re-include the notice before submitting it to the SDK. Problem pointed out, problem fixed. Sheeesh!

Not at all. See above.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Please, report correct information the next time.

I salute vigorous defense of your master!

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: So what? Nothing more than we both know so good.

And which means nothing. See above: you can correct me IF I'm wrong.
Quote:

Quote: Only the first time. If you think it was crime, contact Piru and persuade him to file legal complaint, or better (as you say it was crime) to contact police authorities in Belgium to prosecute Hyperion and its managers.

I think that Piru is well informed. It's up to him, not me, decided what to do.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Please, report correct information the next time. I salute vigorous defense of your master!

I don't see much different between your and Massi contributes to the discussion.

Something that a pacifier may solve:

@cdimauro

Quote:

I don't see much different between your and Massi contributes to the discussion.

Another expert opinion?


Quote:

Something that a pacifier may solve:

Funny enough, my parents told me I refused to use such device...

@cdimauro

Quote:

And which means nothing.

And that was exactly my point.

Quote:

I think that Piru is well informed. It's up to him, not me, decided what to do.

Well, it was you who came with this crime terminology. It is your time, act now... or use device you proposed for other member of this forum.

@pavlor

You don't seem too legally informed (or even less) if you
talk about "criminal intent" and think that case with intel
and amd falls in criminality of common law.

What you meant to say was that "gross negligence" is
seen as equal to "intent" in civil law right ?

And then you go for "you use x86" while you use one too
at least for OS4 right ?

Arguing with you is like being drawn into spider web of
logical inconsistencies , I applaud

Last edited by blizz1220 on 20-Sep-2015 at 12:29 AM.

@All

This has been debated past being informative now right ?

15 pages of various rants, generic opinions and some nuggets of "X happened" with an inconsistent presentation of when each part happened.

I bothered to read the *entire* thread...and the amount of personal narcissistic crap just gave me the impression that the community is stagnating with opinions.

I think this thread is finally done and time to say "goodbye" to it

Add it to the ever colorful history of crap that everyone throws at everyone else.

Yes we have 68K machines and C= AmigaOS releases to 3.1 with Haage&Partner's 3.5 and 3.9.
Yes we have Hyperion-Entertainments "AmigaOS 4.0/4.1" releases on PowerPC.
Yes we have MorphOS on older Mac PPC machines (and some others ?)
Yes we have AROS...

I personally thought I would be able to choose one of the family, initially develop on that and then port it over to the other family members as appropriate...

With events like this I don't really see "porting" as much of an option since everyone seems to be fortifying their camps and throwing more mud into the family feud shitpile.

I'll stick with my own choices and be happy.

As far as this and any past incidents... if it's legally actionable...do so...otherwise find a better way to resolve this stuff.

the whole public dirty laundry thing and expectation of *immediate*(read as "now now now" like a 3yr olds tantrum) makes me think of my 3year old son screaming about not eating broccoli as part of dinner (He actually yells about other things not the broccoli).

Is anyone here not legally able to drink alcohol in whatever jurisdiction?
The way this all reads comes across as very argumentatively bone-headed,
at least as a first impression.

I'm also however very grateful that there IS members of the community able to discuss this rationally (Broadblues, Itix) without the "throwing a tantrum" aspect.

Anyway... if anyone is interested in answering a few questions about MOS/AROS I'm still open to making Japanese available there as well.

@Belxjander

Quote:

Anyway... if anyone is interested in answering a few questions about MOS/AROS I'm still open to making Japanese available there as well.

This is really offtopic here, so why don't you start a new thread? Though, adding support for languages with complex alphabets / input systems really isn't simple since you just can't make this work with legacy applications.

@wawa

Quote:

just dont try to make meta discussion out of everything you dont like to hear. thats "so what"..

One of the top gossip players giving advices ... thanks.

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

@pavlor

Quote:

I don't see much different between your and Massi contributes to the discussion.

I am very happy someone here is fated to make the fortune of AROS not OS4 ...

_________________
SAM440EP-FLEX @ 733 Mhz, AmigaOS 4.1 Update 1

@blizz1220

Quote:

You don't seem too legally informed (or even less) if you talk about "criminal intent" and think that case with intel and amd falls in criminality of common law.

Well, if my memory serves me right, I didn´t commented about that particular case...

Quote:

And then you go for "you use x86" while you use one too

Are you sure you responded to me? For record, I´m great "x86" fan, probably most vocal from all AmigaOS 4.x users.

Quote:

Arguing with you is like being drawn into spider web of logical inconsistencies , I applaud

On the other hand, that sounds like me.

@Belxjander

This feud is more than decade old. Read old forum posts from 2002-2005 to see where all that bad blood and deep hatred have origin. Current "discussion" is civilized in comparison to these times.

Thread like this one are fruit of decade of mutual accusations, distrust and general lack of forgiveness.

@pavlor

fifteen pages about this topic

unfortunately in opposite discussions about cooperation or working together or common software are rather short

@OlafS25

Quote:

unfortunately in opposite discussions about cooperation or working together or common software are rather short

Or mocked by others.