rec.autos.simulators

Maybe if papyrus would have made this product more available, then people
wouldn't be forced to cheat to get it. If they had made converters, then
others would not have been forced to make them. Papyrus has done little to
support ICR2, which is my favorite game. They have practically abandoned
it. We will never see Homestead, St. Louis, Rio, or Japan.

I think most of this probably has to do with money hungry Sierra taking
over Papyrus. They do not know or seem to care what the people there
before them had done. I still hold out hopes that someday these problems
will be rectified, but I doubt it.

So if Sierra has problems with copyright infringements, maybe they should
look for problem solving solutions instead of legal solutions. Just think
if everyone started infringing upon their copyrights we could run them out
of business ( though I don't condone this). Could they afford to bring a
couple million lawsuits against their loyal customers. Just think of the
hours their lawyers would be spending sending off letters to people. At
$250 an hour for a copyright lawyer I don't think this would work.

So Sierra get your stuff together and start supporting your software and
your loyal customers  will support you.

Tell the people where they can buy Indianapolis at. I've already got it.

Bart

Papy isn't the bad guy here.  They no longer have the liscense for Indy, so
they couldn't produce more copies even if they wanted to.  

--

: Maybe if papyrus would have made this product more available, then people
: wouldn't be forced to cheat to get it. If they had made converters, then
: others would not have been forced to make them. Papyrus has done little to
: support ICR2, which is my favorite game. They have practically abandoned
: it. We will never see Homestead, St. Louis, Rio, or Japan.

At one time the IMS track was widely available.  Unfortunately at the
time the only people who were interested were ICR2 fans.  At the time
there were not converters so the NASCAR guys had to desire for the
track.  When the converter became available Papyrus had lost the rights
to IMS (partial due to Tony George's desire to control IMS totally).
Therefore they could not "re-issue" the track pack.  If they could have
they would have.  Since the development and money had already been
spent, it would have just been more money in the pocket.  Now SEGA owns
the IMS license and so . . .

: I think most of this probably has to do with money hungry Sierra taking
: over Papyrus. They do not know or seem to care what the people there
: before them had done. I still hold out hopes that someday these problems
: will be rectified, but I doubt it.

I don't think that Sierra had that much influence on Papyrus losing
interest in CART.  Granted ICRx were not the money makers NASCAR were,
but ICR2 was still one of the top sellers in Sierra's complete stable
when they picked up Papyrus.  The money was still there for support and
future sims based on CART.  However, I think the folks at Papyrus (those
that currently work there) have a "desire" to do NASCAR.  They "drive"
for CART has faded for them.  If they aren't hot-to-trot what kind of
sim do you think we would get?  I also think that "licensing" also
became an issue as I think CART sold the license to Sony (at least for
the "console" market).  Apparently Microsoft bought the rights for the
computer market.  Maybe if the desire had been there, Sierra could have
come up with the money, then again, maybe not....

<snip>
: So Sierra get your stuff together and start supporting your software and
: your loyal customers  will support you.

: Tell the people where they can buy Indianapolis at. I've already got it.

They can't, because there doesn't seem to be any place left with the
original stock.  Though the last I heard *** had copies available
some time ago for the European market.  

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
     Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./.  [-  < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Do you have a $49.95 Mercedes?

------------- remove NOSPAM from my address to email me ------------

"The theory has always been that if you put enough monkeys at enough
typewriters eventually out will come Shakespeare.  Well, now we have
the internet and the theory has been proven wrong."

Then they need to quit pursuing the people who copy the track and trade
it. I had to use a converter to make Indianapolis run on ICR2. I don't
think they should worry about people giving the track away for others
personal use. They have no way of making more profit on the Indianapolis
track so this should be of no concern to Sierra.

 The anally retentive people at Sierra have no continuing intellectual
rights to this property since they no longer offer it. I am glad that a
global company like Microsoft now has the rights to CART. Sure I know that
people have had some problems with Microsoft, but I would rather deal with
a man of Bill Gates character that those that are involved with Sierra.
Sierra is a good company in some respects, but they are very short
sighted. They have been more interested in quickly releasing products,
than making sure that they release a solid product.

Indycar racing was what started the ball rolling on the huge profits in
this industry. World Wide more people are interested in CART than in
Nascar. So I wish Sierra good luck and adios, but I tell all you Nascar
fans that it will not be long before you are abandoned. Bass Fishing 3
will see the light of day before Nascar 3.

It's not Papyrus it's Sierra. I don't think they are bad guys, but I do
think they are petty. They should not threaten legal action if people are
using the trackpack for personal use - no profit. If Sierra no longer
offers the product then they can no longer make money off of it. So then
they need to lay off of people who offer the track. So long as those
people do not try to make a profit off of it. That is the bottom line.
They were to cheap on the cost side to retain the rights for the product,
so they don't want their loyal customers to use an outdated product that
is of no further use to that company.

I respect all of your arguments against what I am saying, but I disagree
with you 100 percent. Indianapolis can not sue Sierra over a product that
it no longer sells. Sierra can not control how people use a product that
it no longer sales. Any good copyrights attorney (and I have retained one
before) will tell that this product is now public domain since no one is
using the intellectual rights of this product to the detriment of Sierra -
i.e. profits. That is the bottom line.

This is the second time you've made this point.  If Sierra/Papyrus
was to allow the free-reign of these indy-posts, then they risk the
license agreements from other tracks.  The other track owner may
say "sure, you can have my track for your game...How ya' gonna
garantee that it doesn't get hacked?"

It's not likely that the words would be verbatum, but I hope you see
what I was getting at.  Basically, if S/P allow someone to illegally
distribute one track, other licenses are in jeopardy.

Best Regards,

Marc

Marc J. Nelson
The Sim Project

Three points:

(i) Copyright has no relation to profit. If I write a program then I own
the copyright to it and continue to do so whether or not I ever wish to
make any profit from it.

(ii) The (important) copyright at stake belongs to IMS, not Sierra. Papy
had a limited license to use IMS's name & likeness. That license has long
since expired. That copyright is most definitely not in the public
domain!!!

(iii) If Sierra stand by & let people violate IMS's copyrights then is
that going to make them look good in IMS's eyes when they next try and
bid for it?

There are no good guys here & no bad guys. Just free market capitalism
;-))

Cheers,
Richard

                                               ~~~~

I guess we all were (in anticipation at least <g>) but I think we were
all racing ICR1 at that time ;-)

Cheers,
Richard

Two thoughts here: First, they probably made a commitment to IMS when they
signed the contract to protect IMS' intellectual property rights with
respect to the IMS track likeness. Second, if they fail to stay up with
this stuff, the chance of signing contracts for other tracks decreases -
would you sign a deal with someone who failed to carry out their
obligations?

I'm sorry, but you're wrong there. Worldwide, the largest audience is F1,
followed by NASCAR, then CART. They were probably too late in the F1 game
to pick up a license for the current drivers with Microprose and Psygnosis
already in the hunt. So they chose to do the "Legends" title to avoid the
licensing issues.

I seriously doubt that either Sierra or Papyrus is going to abandon a title
that has sold more than half a million copies.

I'm also sorry to see Papyrus abandon the CART simulations. But it appears
that they haven't abandoned open-wheel racing, and they are venturing into
some new areas, such as the SODA racing title. I think it's a bit early to
start the doom and gloom predictions.

Dave Sparks
IWCCCARS Project: http://www.theuspits.com/iwcccars
Late Night League: http://www.sequoia-dev.com/Hawaii/latenite.html
Hawaii Handle: davids

I don't know what copyright attorney you are using, but if I were you, I'd
get a new one. Copyrights don't disappear just because a title goes out of
print. Besides, the issue at stake here isn't the copyright on the track
pack, but IMS' rights to the likeness of the track itself.

Dave Sparks
IWCCCARS Project: http://www.theuspits.com/iwcccars
Late Night League: http://www.sequoia-dev.com/Hawaii/latenite.html
Hawaii Handle: davids

Okay, I am going to try and state my case one more time. First of all for
your saying that Indianapolis has " intellectual rights" to the likeness
of it's track. Wrong answer - Copyrights pertain to works of art and
literature, not real estate. Indianapolis has trademarks.- their logos and
emblems are protected by law, anything else is not. If one wants to buy a
piece of property and make a replica of Indianapolis they can. The thing
that they cannot do is use the name, logos, or emblems that belong to
Indianapolis.

As for the copyrights owned by Sierra in regards to IMS. I state that one
can use these files, which they are, under the fair use doctrine. "Fair
Use" allows the reproduction of copyrighted material without permission if
the use is "reasonable"  and not harmful to the copyright owner. Four
criteria must be met in considering whether a particular use is
reasonable.

1) The purpose and character of the use, including whether it is of a
non-profit, educational or of a commercial value. If one gives someone a
copy of these files it is a nonprofit and a non commercial nature.
Criteria one is met, because no money has exchanged hands. Another reason
that it is met, is because people only exchange these files, because their
is no other way for them to obtain this material ( this is the character
of the use).. If one were to sell this material, then they would be in
violation of the law.

2) The amount and importance of the material in relation to the work as a
whole. These are just a few files in relation to the program as a whole.
No one is copying the whole ICR2 or NASCAR2 programs. These files cannot
run without the mother program and without them they are useless. So my
argument here is that these files are not important to the work as a
whole. The integity of the program is not compromised by using these
files. Anyone who has seen these files also understands that that these
files are a tiny fraction of the whole program.

3) The nature of the copyrighted work. These are files that are no longer
of any use to Sierra. Since they lost the contract to sell IMS, they have
no further use for these files. These are just discarded waste amongst
their vast commercial property. If at some point they do reobtain the
right to sell IMS. The files, program that it runs on, and key
characteristics (look of the course) will have so changed that it will
have rendered these files useless.

4)The effect of the use on the potential market or value of the
copyrighted work. Their is no potential market, because Sierra no longer
sells this product. The copyrighted work also has no value, because they
can no longer sell this product.

I do not think that it is anyones' intention to harm Sierra's market value
by using these files for personal use. I am totally against pirating
someone elses hard work. These files are no longer of any value to Sierra
and I do not think that they are forced to play net nanny for IMS. IMS can
come out with this new program, with ABC, and blow what has been done in
the past out of the water, making these files obsolete.

It is not my intention to copy these files fo anyone else. This is just an
argument that I feel someone else can use - if they do copy these files -
to justify the fair use of these files.

It is also not my intention to get into a petty bickering match with
anyone over this philosophy. If a lawyer can show me where I am wrong then
please show me - I am always delighted to find out new information. Where
in the copyright code does it say that we can't have "fair use" of an
obsolete product. Don't try and intimidate me into thinking I am wrong
just because you are a lawyer -please show me so that I can understand
this.

[some thoughtful comments snipped throughout for brevity]

It's not clear to me exactly what property rights IMSC licensed to Papyrus,
since I don't have access to their license agreement. I believe that IMS
could very well make the case that their speedway is the expression of an
idea, and if somewhat creates an exact likeness of it, then they have
violated a copyright. I don't know that this has been tested in court, but
I certainly wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of a subpoena if they
decided to test it. And as you mentioned, there are trademarks and logos
that were licensed in the deal.

It's been awhile since I reviewed the "fair use" statutes, but I'm pretty
sure that the current court interpretation is much narrower than the
statute appears to read. In particular, the court has narrowed the fair use
of copyright materials for educational uses, and also use by the press.
Audio and video clips are typically limited to 15 seconds, and written
excerpts restricted to a single paragraph.

The IMS track was sold as a separate track pack, which also included a
paint kit. I would think it would be relatively easy for Papyrus to make
the case that the IMS track itself represented the majority of value of the
work.

Yes, but they do have value to IMS, who have now licensed their rights to
another company.

Again, the value is not so much to Papyrus, but to IMS, who holds the
ultimate property rights in the product.

Again, you have to consider that Papyrus is highly dependent on licenses in
its business. If they give an impression of weakness in enforcing those
licensed rights by refusing to crack down on infringement, they stand a
good chance of losing out to someone more aggressive in that area. The
licensing market is very hot right now, sometimes just having the right
name on the box can double or triple sales. Imagine what would happen to
sales if Papyrus had to release a stock car racing title without the NASCAR
name on the box.

Dave Sparks
IWCCCARS Project: http://www.theuspits.com/iwcccars
Late Night League: http://www.sequoia-dev.com/Hawaii/latenite.html
Hawaii Handle: davids

Bart