Re: Papy's position on Daytona

Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Ah0s4.46149$[email hidden]... > I am bending over and using the Daytona track in my full version of N3.As > I said in my original post, it seems somewhat equitable to me. I don't > think the "false advertising" on the N3 box is so bad that we need tolaunch > a class action suit or have some state AG try to go after them. But it > shouldn't be there, anymore than a hacked Daytona should be on my hard > drive. Papy has to take a certain stance in everything they do if theyever What the hell is all this babble about??? Just use the track and shut the hell up :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

I've also forwarded a copy to the Iowa State Attorney General's Consumer Fraud Division. Jim "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Marc-- > > Exquisitely well-put and to the point. I've sent the followingquestion > to Sierra, though I don't harbor any fantasies that I'll get astraight

Quoted text (7 lines)

> answer -- or any answer at all: > > ----------------------------------------------- > > The blurb on the NASCAR 3 packaging states: > > "The award-winning team that brought you the long-running NASCAR

Racing

Quoted text (11 lines)

> series of simulations has done it again. NASCAR Racing 3 includes > updates for ALL [emphasis added] of the cars, tracks, and drivers from > the 1999 NASCAR Winston Cup and NASCAR Busch Series, Grand National > Division seasons." > > Even your N3 website states: > "NASCAR Racing 3 will also include the cars and tracks from the Busch > Grand National series. > > As you well know, this isn't true -- the most important track in ANY > NASCAR Cup and Busch season, Daytona, is only available as a demo

under

Quoted text (9 lines)

> very special circumstances. > > As someone on rec.autos.simulators quite correctly observed, using the > Daytona 500 to market your product is a great move -- but what are > prospective new buyers of your NASCAR sim going to think of > Sierra/Papyrus when they buy N3 -- after reading the packaging and > believing that ALL the NASCAR tracks are included -- and then > discovering that they DON'T get Daytona? It's not like they'll be > missing Martinsville or Las Vegas [no offense to Martinsville and

Vegas

Quoted text (7 lines)

> fans -- BB]. > > I think this is beyond misleading, and does not reflect at all well on > Sierra/Papyrus. I think the fact that it's easy to perceive your > packaging and web "features" list is intentionally misleading also > promotes and legitimizes, in some peoples' minds, pirating Daytona and > offering it for download, possibly even for sale, on the Web -- you

know > that it's happened before, with Indianapolis, and you have to know > somebody's going to do it with Daytona. > > As a Sierra customer, I'd like to know what possible motivation you > could have for this ultimately self-injurious misinformation in youradvertising.

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > Thanks for your time. > > Bart Brown > > ----------------------------------------------- > > Marc Collins wrote: > >> Unlike the NR1999 retail box which detailed which tracks were > included, the > > language on the N3 box would lead anyone with even a cursory

knowledge of > > NASCAR racing to assume that the premier track, Daytona, wasincluded."

Nah. They can just use the 15 bucks they're charging for the daytona track, that should have been included with N3. "Mitch Alatorre" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:upXr4.2158$[email hidden]... > Just what we need, more stinking lawyers involved. More resourcestaken > away from the development team that must now be applied to the legaldept. > Gee Thanks for all your help! > > Mitch > > <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:88p345$nhh$[email hidden]... > > I've also forwarded a copy to the Iowa State Attorney General'sConsumer

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > Fraud Division. > > > > Jim > > > > "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Marc-- > > > > > > Exquisitely well-put and to the point. I've sent the following > > question > > > to Sierra, though I don't harbor any fantasies that I'll get a > > straight > > > answer -- or any answer at all: > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > > > The blurb on the NASCAR 3 packaging states: > > > > > > "The award-winning team that brought you the long-running NASCAR > > Racing > > > series of simulations has done it again. NASCAR Racing 3 includes > > > updates for ALL [emphasis added] of the cars, tracks, and drivers

from > > > the 1999 NASCAR Winston Cup and NASCAR Busch Series, GrandNational > > > Division seasons." > > > > > > Even your N3 website states: > > > "NASCAR Racing 3 will also include the cars and tracks from theBusch > > > Grand National series. > > > > > > As you well know, this isn't true -- the most important track inANY > > > NASCAR Cup and Busch season, Daytona, is only available as a demo > > under > > > very special circumstances. > > > > > > As someone on rec.autos.simulators quite correctly observed, usingthe

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > Daytona 500 to market your product is a great move -- but what are > > > prospective new buyers of your NASCAR sim going to think of > > > Sierra/Papyrus when they buy N3 -- after reading the packaging and > > > believing that ALL the NASCAR tracks are included -- and then > > > discovering that they DON'T get Daytona? It's not like they'll be > > > missing Martinsville or Las Vegas [no offense to Martinsville and > > Vegas > > > fans -- BB]. > > > > > > I think this is beyond misleading, and does not reflect at all

well on > > > Sierra/Papyrus. I think the fact that it's easy to perceive your > > > packaging and web "features" list is intentionally misleading also > > > promotes and legitimizes, in some peoples' minds, pirating Daytonaand > > > offering it for download, possibly even for sale, on the Web --you > > know > > > that it's happened before, with Indianapolis, and you have to know > > > somebody's going to do it with Daytona. > > > > > > As a Sierra customer, I'd like to know what possible motivationyou > > > could have for this ultimately self-injurious misinformation inyour

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > advertising. > > > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > > > > Bart Brown > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > > >> Unlike the NR1999 retail box which detailed which tracks were > > > included, the > > > > language on the N3 box would lead anyone with even a cursory > > knowledge of > > > > NASCAR racing to assume that the premier track, Daytona, was > > included." > > > >

Just what we need, more stinking lawyers involved. More resources taken away from the development team that must now be applied to the legal dept. Gee Thanks for all your help! Mitch <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:88p345$nhh$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (72 lines)

> I've also forwarded a copy to the Iowa State Attorney General's Consumer > Fraud Division. > > Jim > > "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Marc-- > > > > Exquisitely well-put and to the point. I've sent the following > question > > to Sierra, though I don't harbor any fantasies that I'll get a > straight > > answer -- or any answer at all: > > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > The blurb on the NASCAR 3 packaging states: > > > > "The award-winning team that brought you the long-running NASCAR > Racing > > series of simulations has done it again. NASCAR Racing 3 includes > > updates for ALL [emphasis added] of the cars, tracks, and drivers from > > the 1999 NASCAR Winston Cup and NASCAR Busch Series, Grand National > > Division seasons." > > > > Even your N3 website states: > > "NASCAR Racing 3 will also include the cars and tracks from the Busch > > Grand National series. > > > > As you well know, this isn't true -- the most important track in ANY > > NASCAR Cup and Busch season, Daytona, is only available as a demo > under > > very special circumstances. > > > > As someone on rec.autos.simulators quite correctly observed, using the > > Daytona 500 to market your product is a great move -- but what are > > prospective new buyers of your NASCAR sim going to think of > > Sierra/Papyrus when they buy N3 -- after reading the packaging and > > believing that ALL the NASCAR tracks are included -- and then > > discovering that they DON'T get Daytona? It's not like they'll be > > missing Martinsville or Las Vegas [no offense to Martinsville and > Vegas > > fans -- BB]. > > > > I think this is beyond misleading, and does not reflect at all well on > > Sierra/Papyrus. I think the fact that it's easy to perceive your > > packaging and web "features" list is intentionally misleading also > > promotes and legitimizes, in some peoples' minds, pirating Daytona and > > offering it for download, possibly even for sale, on the Web -- you > know > > that it's happened before, with Indianapolis, and you have to know > > somebody's going to do it with Daytona. > > > > As a Sierra customer, I'd like to know what possible motivation you > > could have for this ultimately self-injurious misinformation in your > advertising. > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > > Bart Brown > > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > >> Unlike the NR1999 retail box which detailed which tracks were > > included, the > > > language on the N3 box would lead anyone with even a cursory > knowledge of > > > NASCAR racing to assume that the premier track, Daytona, was > included." >

As long as you realise that this American penchant for calling in lawyers for every possible action and complaint is what got all of us (sim racers) in to this licensing mess in the first place. Marc. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:88p345$nhh$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (72 lines)

> I've also forwarded a copy to the Iowa State Attorney General's Consumer > Fraud Division. > > Jim > > "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Marc-- > > > > Exquisitely well-put and to the point. I've sent the following > question > > to Sierra, though I don't harbor any fantasies that I'll get a > straight > > answer -- or any answer at all: > > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > The blurb on the NASCAR 3 packaging states: > > > > "The award-winning team that brought you the long-running NASCAR > Racing > > series of simulations has done it again. NASCAR Racing 3 includes > > updates for ALL [emphasis added] of the cars, tracks, and drivers from > > the 1999 NASCAR Winston Cup and NASCAR Busch Series, Grand National > > Division seasons." > > > > Even your N3 website states: > > "NASCAR Racing 3 will also include the cars and tracks from the Busch > > Grand National series. > > > > As you well know, this isn't true -- the most important track in ANY > > NASCAR Cup and Busch season, Daytona, is only available as a demo > under > > very special circumstances. > > > > As someone on rec.autos.simulators quite correctly observed, using the > > Daytona 500 to market your product is a great move -- but what are > > prospective new buyers of your NASCAR sim going to think of > > Sierra/Papyrus when they buy N3 -- after reading the packaging and > > believing that ALL the NASCAR tracks are included -- and then > > discovering that they DON'T get Daytona? It's not like they'll be > > missing Martinsville or Las Vegas [no offense to Martinsville and > Vegas > > fans -- BB]. > > > > I think this is beyond misleading, and does not reflect at all well on > > Sierra/Papyrus. I think the fact that it's easy to perceive your > > packaging and web "features" list is intentionally misleading also > > promotes and legitimizes, in some peoples' minds, pirating Daytona and > > offering it for download, possibly even for sale, on the Web -- you > know > > that it's happened before, with Indianapolis, and you have to know > > somebody's going to do it with Daytona. > > > > As a Sierra customer, I'd like to know what possible motivation you > > could have for this ultimately self-injurious misinformation in your > advertising. > > > > Thanks for your time. > > > > Bart Brown > > > > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > >> Unlike the NR1999 retail box which detailed which tracks were > > included, the > > > language on the N3 box would lead anyone with even a cursory > knowledge of > > > NASCAR racing to assume that the premier track, Daytona, was > included." >

Get real. Unless Sierra's dragging people out of Legal to do their coding, it's not terribly likely that development will suffer; and while I'm as dismayed at anyone about the frivolously litigious nature of modern society -- and not just America's: I read all about it in the Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal papers, too -- it seems rather disingenuous for people to publicly whine about Sierra/Papyrus' lack of "truth in advertising" and then refuse to contemplate the only recourse we have, as consumers, to possibly do something about it. Connecticut has a very active Consumer Affairs department within the Attorney General's office, and AG Dick Blumenthal has laid down some hard law on behalf of consumers, without which we would have been entirely at the mercy of, for example, Northeast Utilities, which attempted to pass along the uncontrollable costs of their completely failed nuclear power generation plan to every electric customer in the state. Truth in advertising is no joke, and this particular chicanery on the part of Sierra/Papyrus is hardly something new for that particular company. If all you care to do is piss and moan about it, without taking any action -- fruitless as it may seem -- then you have no moral ground to complain about getting shafted, and you certainly have no business criticizing anyone who at least *tries* to remedy the situation. As for the "licensing mess," it wasn't the "American penchant for calling in lawyers" that started it, it was big corporate lawyers looking to milk every penny out of every possible use of trademarks and registered names, and also looking to avoid any possible grounds for suit for using someone ELSE's trademarks. The current situation with Mattel and Ferrari is an excellent example. Corporations like Sierra have legal staffs to handle this sort of thing -- and I'm sure the present case with Daytona is some trademark hassle with ISC/NASCAR, just as it was before with Tony George/IMS, just as it always has been and seemingly always WILL be with Bernie Ecclestone/FOCA/FIA/FOA/whatever. All we customers have to counter such rubbish are consumer laws, like "truth in advertising". So it's either that, or bend over and smile. Instead, you guys want to bend over and bitch. Not good enough... BB Mitch Alatorre wrote: > > Just what we need, more stinking lawyers involved. More resources taken > away from the development team that must now be applied to the legal dept. > Gee Thanks for all your help! Marc Collins wrote: > > As long as you realise that this American penchant for calling in lawyers > for every possible action and complaint is what got all of us (sim racers) > in to this licensing mess in the first place. > > Marc

I am bending over and using the Daytona track in my full version of N3. As I said in my original post, it seems somewhat equitable to me. I don't think the "false advertising" on the N3 box is so bad that we need to launch a class action suit or have some state AG try to go after them. But it shouldn't be there, anymore than a hacked Daytona should be on my hard drive. Papy has to take a certain stance in everything they do if they ever want to be in a position to negotiate for licenses in the future, but I also don't think they are so ignorant or naive as to not understand what would happen to the Daytona files on the CD once the rabid fans here got their hands on them. 95% of the purchasers of N3 still won't have a clue as to the existence of Daytona. What is vastly more important than this little Daytona blip of excitement is what tracks, cars and drivers will be included in N4. With EA breathing down their necks, Sierra and Papy better get (and be prepared to pay for) a full credible license for the next issue...if one company doesn't have to exaggerate on the back of the box, then the one that does is sinking fast. I own every racing sim (and every other software title I use) on my drive and do not pirate software...especially things like obscure racing sims where the developers need every sale they can get to justify producing new titles. However, if a "missing" component of one of those titles becomes available, but cannot be purchased in any kind of straightforward manner, I will gladly download and enjoy it. Likewise, every racing sim. company out there is happy to sell me an annual update to their game and charge me full price for it. C'est la vie. Marc. "Barton Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (44 lines)

> Get real. Unless Sierra's dragging people out of Legal to do their > coding, it's not terribly likely that development will suffer; and while > I'm as dismayed at anyone about the frivolously litigious nature of > modern society -- and not just America's: I read all about it in the > Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal papers, too -- it seems rather > disingenuous for people to publicly whine about Sierra/Papyrus' lack of > "truth in advertising" and then refuse to contemplate the only recourse > we have, as consumers, to possibly do something about it. Connecticut > has a very active Consumer Affairs department within the Attorney > General's office, and AG Dick Blumenthal has laid down some hard law on > behalf of consumers, without which we would have been entirely at the > mercy of, for example, Northeast Utilities, which attempted to pass > along the uncontrollable costs of their completely failed nuclear power > generation plan to every electric customer in the state. > > Truth in advertising is no joke, and this particular chicanery on the > part of Sierra/Papyrus is hardly something new for that particular > company. If all you care to do is piss and moan about it, without taking > any action -- fruitless as it may seem -- then you have no moral ground > to complain about getting shafted, and you certainly have no business > criticizing anyone who at least *tries* to remedy the situation. > > As for the "licensing mess," it wasn't the "American penchant for > calling in lawyers" that started it, it was big corporate lawyers > looking to milk every penny out of every possible use of trademarks and > registered names, and also looking to avoid any possible grounds for > suit for using someone ELSE's trademarks. The current situation with > Mattel and Ferrari is an excellent example. Corporations like Sierra > have legal staffs to handle this sort of thing -- and I'm sure the > present case with Daytona is some trademark hassle with ISC/NASCAR, just > as it was before with Tony George/IMS, just as it always has been and > seemingly always WILL be with Bernie Ecclestone/FOCA/FIA/FOA/whatever. > All we customers have to counter such rubbish are consumer laws, like > "truth in advertising". So it's either that, or bend over and smile. > Instead, you guys want to bend over and bitch. Not good enough... > > BB > > > > Mitch Alatorre wrote: > > > > Just what we need, more stinking lawyers involved. More resources taken > > away from the development team that must now be applied to the legal

dept.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Gee Thanks for all your help! > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > > > As long as you realise that this American penchant for calling in

lawyers > > for every possible action and complaint is what got all of us (simracers) > > in to this licensing mess in the first place. > > > > Marc

Send me a working copy of the NL Daytona and I promise not another word from me!! :) At least I have never contributed to any of the Daytona Sierra Papy *** theories threads. :) Marc.

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > I am bending over and using the Daytona track in my full version of N3. > As > > I said in my original post, it seems somewhat equitable to me. I don't > > think the "false advertising" on the N3 box is so bad that we need to > launch > > a class action suit or have some state AG try to go after them. But it > > shouldn't be there, anymore than a hacked Daytona should be on my hard > > drive. Papy has to take a certain stance in everything they do if they > ever > What the hell is all this babble about??? Just use the track and shut > the hell up :-) > -- > Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. > cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com