home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
- Path: sparky!uunet!nevada.edu!jimi!slumos
- From: slumos@unlv.edu (Steve Lumos)
- Subject: Re: Tetris gripe
- Message-ID: <1992Jul28.050621.17927@unlv.edu>
- Sender: news@unlv.edu (News User)
- Organization: UNLV Computer Science
- References: <1992Jul24.021611.12788@panix.com> <1992Jul24.165919.16653@midway.uchicago.edu> <1992Jul27.194352.13262@njitgw.njit.edu>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 05:06:21 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- In article <1992Jul27.194352.13262@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
- >I'm surprised IBM even considered talking to SH. Tetris has been
- >around in public domain form at least a year before SH released their
- >version (remember the kid from Russia who invented it?). True, the PD
- >game was only text-mode, but it still invalidates any claim on the
- >concept.
-
- Setting aside the fact that Tetris is PD and that, like you said,
- somebody probably didn't do their homework at IBM, are you REALLY
- suprized that IBM went to SH? I mean, look at the installation program
- with the screen that says "The following Trademarks are used in this
- installation program." Look at the help system and all the hypertext
- links to trademarks for MS and others. I think IBM is famous for
- overkill in the legal dept.
-
- >I'd be really disgusted if IBM had to pay royalties for a PD program.
- >Unless this version was going to have SH's graphical title screens and
- >stuff.
-
- This is true. It sounds unethical that SH would try to charge IBM
- considering that they probably didn't give anything to the original
- author. They did put his name in the game, but that was for commercial
- reasons as much as anything else I would bet.
-
- TTYL - Steve
- --
- Steve Lumos - slumos@cs.unlv.edu
-