rec.autos.simulators

by **Randy Magrud** » Sat, 01 Jun 1996 04:00:00

>Any way, it's an interesting
>and accessible read. My personal opinion is that even though Lotus
>failed, this may be due to the characterictics of the bench. i.e.
>Judges steeped in the protection of literary works. Good or bad, I
>think this "new" standard will become, in essence, the standard for
>software protection.

Actually, you should read the actual decision before you render this
opinion. The Appeals court looked at a single aspect of the Lotus
interface: the menu hierarchy, and determined it was analogous to the
controls on a VCR. You cannot copyright "methods of operation", and
the menu layout was designed to be a "method of operation" and thus
not protected under copyright law. This is a good analogy for this
case, and certainly to the benefit of the public -- think how you'd
feel if every VCR had to have the buttons laid out in a different way,
or stereo systems had to make sure their console looked and operated
unlike any other console. Anyway, I'm sure you can find the text of
the appeal court ruling somewhere if you like. It goes into detail.

Randy

by **Rick Beilfu** » Mon, 03 Jun 1996 04:00:00

I would like to thank Jed and others for their attempt at Daytona. But
before everyone gets too upset (probably too late) my guess is that in
5 or 6 months from now, it won't make much difference.

No, Daytona won't be included in Nascar 2, but pure specutlation says
that with all the track changes, Nascar's main render engine
improvements, and other feature enhancements that Nascar 1's tracks
will not be compatible with Nascar 2.

Another GUESS on my part is that with all those changes, and the
premier of "Hawaii", along with the need for equality, that Nascar 2
will be required for "Hawaii".

Another GUESS is that with Nascar 2's improvements, including improved
AI, improved tracks, more features - and it's requirement for
"Hawaii", that noone will want to use Nascar 1 after Nascar 2 is out.

How's that for some speculating.

Rick

by **Blaine Bet** » Wed, 05 Jun 1996 04:00:00

oh, btw....***sega.... if i get my hands on the patch, i'll put it on
my web pge for all, and i do mean ALL to grab. if they come after me
they cant get much... 'cause all i got is a whole lot 'o' nothin!

Blaine B.

by **Stuart Boo** » Wed, 05 Jun 1996 04:00:00

>No, Daytona won't be included in Nascar 2, but pure specutlation says
>that with all the track changes, Nascar's main render engine
>improvements, and other feature enhancements that Nascar 1's tracks
>will not be compatible with Nascar 2.

Q: How compatible were Nascar 1's tracks with ICR2 and vice versa.
A: very!

A way to convert ICR1's Indy course was found too. Also, remember
they've said that some of the big flaws (curves in the pit lane at
some tracks) HAVEN'T/WON'T be fixed, much to the irritation of some
important members of Papyrus too! So I reckon they will be in some way
compatible, if not directly. Of course, Papyrus could change their
file format to knock such efforts on the head. That's perfectly within
their rights, but worth it?

I think it's already been said that that is indeed the case. At least,
that was MY understanding of the situation.

Definitely agree. But there are still people out there playing ICR1
(probably because it's easier to play, than because of the bugs in
ICR2 I suspect!), so I'm sure some will not bother with NCR2 for
whatever reason. Personally, if the graphics are faster, and the AI
better, I can't see any reason to stick with NCR1 at all. Well, unless
there's a REALLY big stinker of a bug or it's rushed out for Xmas as
ICR2 appears to have been (witness the much delayed patch, commendable
as bringing it out with a Win95 version is)

Stuart

--
Stuart Booth
Somewhere in Godalming, England, UK

by **Eldred Picke** » Thu, 06 Jun 1996 04:00:00

>Subject: Re: DAYTONA - ITS NEVER GOING TO BE! :-(
>Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 20:23:35 GMT

>>>| Just as Lotus sued other software companies for violating copyrights based
>>>on
>>>| 'look and feel' of their program.
>>>...and lost
>>Ok, but how much did it cost the other companies to DEFEND themselves?
>This is a good point that is often overlooked when discussing legal
>remedies. When does any corp. win a legal battle? Of course, a
>simplistic formula would merely involve the balancing of net gains
>against the net cost of pursuing such a battle. But how do we measure
>the losses and gains and where do we stop? Perhaps some legal
>economists out there would care to jump in?
>Mike

I'm also curious about copyright law, as it pertains to this discussion. Can
anybody refer us to some decent reference books? Maybe I'll see if I can find
an alt.legal - something...

________

Eldred Pickett

I am NOT paranoid. And why are you always watching me?!?

by **Eldred Picke** » Thu, 06 Jun 1996 04:00:00

>Subject: Re: DAYTONA - ITS NEVER GOING TO BE! :-(
>Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 22:19:52 GMT
>I would like to thank Jed and others for their attempt at Daytona. But
>before everyone gets too upset (probably too late) my guess is that in
>5 or 6 months from now, it won't make much difference.
>No, Daytona won't be included in Nascar 2, but pure specutlation says
>that with all the track changes, Nascar's main render engine
>improvements, and other feature enhancements that Nascar 1's tracks
>will not be compatible with Nascar 2.
>Another GUESS on my part is that with all those changes, and the
>premier of "Hawaii", along with the need for equality, that Nascar 2
>will be required for "Hawaii".
>Another GUESS is that with Nascar 2's improvements, including improved
>AI, improved tracks, more features - and it's requirement for
>"Hawaii", that noone will want to use Nascar 1 after Nascar 2 is out.
>How's that for some speculating.
>Rick

Well, a LOT of people(myself included) prefer ICR1 over ICR2. Something about
an underpowered machine...<g>
...Not to mention the bugs...
________

Eldred Pickett

I am NOT paranoid. And why are you always watching me?!?

by **Kevin Bro** » Fri, 07 Jun 1996 04:00:00

>ites:

>>Subject: Re: DAYTONA - ITS NEVER GOING TO BE! :-(
>>Date: 26 May 1996 18:01:33 -0400

>>>This IS NOT A BREACH of licensing...if you don't use the name "Daytona"
>>>there is not a breach.

>>Not true. Daytona licenses the "likeness" of their track.

>Just as Lotus sued other software companies for violating copyrights based on
>'look and feel' of their program.

No. Lotus sued specifically because the menu structure was copied word for word.
Apple is who you're thinking of.

BTW, both lawsuits eventually lost. But not before they took down some smaller
companies. It took a company with the resources to fight back (Borland for Lotus,
Microsoft for Apple) before the they lost.

-Kev

by **Mike Donnel** » Sun, 09 Jun 1996 04:00:00

reguard to reality...

Perhaps not immediately, but, as an add-on after Sega's license runs out.

Nope. NCR2 will be a brother of ICR2 and as we saw with Indy's ICR2
conversion, the data wasn't so modified that you couldn't make the change.

That was a no-brainer as Papyrus had already said as much.

I wouldn't bet on it. I've been to ICR a few times after ICR2 has been out.
Besides, there are always some folks who don't have the hardware to run the
latest stuff.

Mike

--
___^___ Speed Bump Motorsports... The name says it all.
NRL95 #110 Hershey's Kisses Chevrolet Monte Carlo
PRO95 #53 Hershey's Kisses Penske PC23/Ilmor D
SIMCAR96 #45 Hershey's Kisses Pontiac Grand Prix
PRO96 #2 Hershey's Kisses Reynard/Honda/Firestone
IVGA #2027 (membership, not the car!)

by **RStonefe** » Tue, 18 Jun 1996 04:00:00

Why don't all the racing web pages agree to have the daytona patch
avaiable? they can't sue all of us!

by **James Bev** » Tue, 18 Jun 1996 04:00:00

I think they probably can ...

Come on folks, surely your lives are still worth living without this
patch? With respect to Jed et al, it's simply a rearranged Talladega, not
the real Daytona track.

James

--
James Bevan

NeXTMail & MIME welcome

by **John Wallac** » Tue, 18 Jun 1996 04:00:00

a) They probably can - their lawyers would have some serious wood at the
thought of all that juicy litigation.

b) They don't need to. I'm sure they'll be able to guess who wrote it
and go and sue him.

Give it a rest. Just accept that Daytona's never going to be.
Alternatively, hack around and make yourself one - it's obviously not
impossible.... ;)

Cheers!
John

_________________________________
__ _____| |_____ __
_________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |_________

\ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | /
> :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | <
/ :|__|::|____:/ Sim Racing News \.____|::|__| \
/_______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm\::/ \._______\

by **Mike Carrother** » Tue, 18 Jun 1996 04:00:00

writes:

Wanna bet?

by **Ash** » Tue, 25 Jun 1996 04:00:00

Okay the way I see it if people over the Internet can post and exchange
kiddie-*** with so much ease then why can't one guy e-mail the patch to
one guy then that guy e-mail the patch to the next guy and so one they
can't do anything if we don't post it on a bbs our all we have to do is
start a mass mailing list i'm all for it if anyone else is in fact we
could all e-mail each other all kinds of little nascar racing gems
(carsets, tracks, editors, ect..) we find scattered throughout the net

by **Kyle Langst** » Wed, 26 Jun 1996 04:00:00

>Okay the way I see it if people over the Internet can post and exchange
>kiddie-*** with so much ease then why can't one guy e-mail the patch to
>one guy then that guy e-mail the patch to the next guy and so one they
>can't do anything if we don't post it on a bbs our all we have to do is
>start a mass mailing list i'm all for it if anyone else is in fact we
>could all e-mail each other all kinds of little nascar racing gems
>(carsets, tracks, editors, ect..) we find scattered throughout the net

If we have a mailing list, everyone that subscribes to it would be
willfully and knowingly breaking the copyright law. And the FBI guys
would know how where it all came from: Jan Kohl and the guys.

Kyle Langston

PowWow - same

by **Robert P Da** » Wed, 26 Jun 1996 04:00:00

Take a breath and a quick refresher course in the use of punctuation,
then try your post again...