home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!not-for-mail
- From: hanway@ekfido.kodak.com (Ed Hanway)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.emulations,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
- Subject: Re: v1.3 ROM copying illegal? (was Re: kickstart 512k rom image (copy wanted))
- Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.amiga.emulations,comp.sys.amiga.hardware
- Date: 23 Feb 1996 13:48:16 GMT
- Organization: Eastman Kodak Company
- Message-ID: <4gkgj0$1v3@thetimes.pixel.kodak.com>
- References: <312914DE.27BE@cs.duke.edu> <4ge9lm$67k@daily-planet.execpc.com> <4gf610$9cl@bignews.shef.ac.uk> <4gg9dk$r3j@serpens.rhein.de> <4ghpkv$600@bignews.shef.ac.uk>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: vampire.ekfido.kodak.com
- X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 950726BETA PL0]
-
- Chris (ELA95CSH@shef.ac.uk) wrote:
- : In article <4gg9dk$r3j@serpens.rhein.de>, mlelstv@serpens.rhein.de says...
- : >>I belive Commodore gave their permission for the version 1.3 (and below) ROM
- : >>image to be distributed freely, for use with downgraders. Am I right?
- : >
- : >You are not right.
- :
- : Are you sure? I remember (vaguley) reading in Amiga Format or CU Amiga, AGES
- : AGO, that using the 1.3 ROM for degrading (or something) was ok - it might
- : have been Commodore UK who originally said so?
-
- I would like to hear of a more concrete reference than this. Bear in
- mind that what's printed in a magazine is not always correct. Also,
- Commodore UK probably didn't hold the copyright in the first place,
- so even if they said something like this, it may not have been approved at
- the proper level.
-
- I've had a dealer tell me that 2.1 was public domain, and he swore that's
- what his Commodore sales rep told him, so you can't even believe everything
- attributed to Commodore unless it's confirmed at a high enough level.
-
- --
- Ed Hanway <hanway@ekfido.kodak.com>
- Eastman Kodak - Motion Picture & Television Imaging, Cineon Development
- Opinions expressed are my own, except the ones which aren't.
-