home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- >>>>> "Jason" == Jason Compton <jcompton@flood.xnet.com> writes:
- In article <4ge30o$k3v@flood.xnet.com> jcompton@flood.xnet.com (Jason Compton) writes:
-
-
- Stuart> Stuart Friedman (stufried@ix.netcom.com) wrote: dirty
- Stuart> team). With Apple's litigation history, everything has to
- Stuart> then be triple checked legally before it gets out the
- Stuart> door. Remember that if Apple nails him on one point he
- Stuart> could be in big trouble.
-
- Jason> Four generations of Macintosh emulation on the Amiga have
- Jason> gone by unchallenged. The biggest ligitation threats came
- Jason> from one emulation firm who claimed that two others stole
- Jason> from him.
-
- Executor is different, in that we do not require the end-user to have
- purchased or otherwise obtained any system software (ROM, ROM image,
- System file) from Apple. The Mac emulators for the Amiga were useless
- without system software from Apple, so if you assume that the users of
- these emulators were obeying copyright law, then in some way Apple was
- paid a royalty for each Mac emulator for the Amiga. This may not seem
- important, since often the ROMs came from defunct Macs, but it did
- mean that each Amiga emulator legally running corresponded to the sale
- of a Mac or the Mac System File at some point in the past.
-
- Executor has a rewrite (from scratch, using strictly clean-room
- techniques) of the Macintosh Operating System and Toolbox routines, so
- Apple isn't getting a royalty even in the marginal sense as described
- above when Executor is sold. Were Executor to get ragingly popular
- and ARDI were to sell 100,000 units or even 1,000,000 units, there
- would not suddenly be a shortage of Mac ROMs holding us back.
-
- Because of these significant differences we can't be sloppy or rest
- easy just because the makers of Mac emulators for the Amiga haven't
- been sued.
-
- --Cliff
- ctm@ardi.com
-
-