Why can't we post the tracks for Daytona and Indy, We post the cars all
of the time. Do the sponsors get pissed? *** no they don't. In my
opinion, if they can't do anything about the car posting, they can't do
anything about the tracks. Let me know what you all think.
I think we have been here before, and done this. Thats what I think. You
want the tracks? Go to alt.binaries.warez. Look for and post your files
there with the rest of the jolly rogers.
Life is like a bunch of USENET users..........
Robert
The short answer is "because the owners of the tracks will sue you."
(It's there bat and ball, and they've decided to not let you play with
it. And they've got enough money to pay enough lawyers to make their
statement stick...)
---Jim Sokoloff
The only reason that the sponsors aren't getting mad is because we are
seeing their products. Some of us might go out and buy a product because
of a car we saw. What do tracks have to benefit from us recreating them?
Nothing at all. Because, honestly, how many people would go miles from
their homes just because they saw a track for a computer game? Hardly any.
This is just my opinion.
--
Vincent Cosentino
The first thing you need to do is clean up your messages. There are
young folks out there that read the news too. The four letter words just
show your limited vocabulary.
As for posting tracks, there are legal reasons for not being allowed to.
Papyrus has contracts with the Indy and NASCAR people. If the conteacts
are not followed, Papyrus/Sierra are in for a big time in court. The
same applies to people on the net. If you want to post Indy or Daytona,
you better have lots of money, 'cause it's goning to cost you.
Tim Farley
Taking into account the legalise involved...
It's unfortunate that those who would gladly purchase say the Indy
expansion pack(ICR1)for example cannot because it is no longer for sale
would have to resort to so-called piracy to obtain it.Sure there are
agreements between various parties but it seems stupid to not allow it
to be made available for download by Papy themselves or by a 3rd
party.As someone stated here last week Sim racers make up a very small
percentage of the software buying public.Taking that into account I
can't see any substantial profit loss by Papy,Nascar,Indycar er CART or
anyone else by making it available.We're not talking about Micro$oft
Office here.After all it's not like Papy is going to release another ICR
sim anytime soon.And even if they were what better way to encourage
customer loyalty than to make un-obtainable add-ons obtainable.I'm sure
most in this NG would appreciate it and take it into account when
considering a future software purchase.JMO
Steve at RXspeed7 racing
Honestly, the tracks have alot to gain. I am one of those who went miles
from my home to Talladega this weekend to watch a race on my favorite
track. It was not my favorite track until I started driving it in N1 then
again later in N2. It is ridiculous (sp?) that Daytona and Indianapolis
have made such a big deal over nothing. Anyway, IMHO.
Chris.
This, as I understand it, would be perfectly legal. Key on the word ' NEW
'.
bluffing.
So, those 'gutless' guys at the " Pits " can go ahead and publish Daytona,
knowing that you will pick up any and all legal fees? THANKS! Hey Jed,
how about posting the track? Someone is willing to take the heat for you!
First you talk about designing a new track, now you want to copy Daytona.
Which is it gona be?
Quoted text (16 lines)
> Taking into account the legalise involved... > It's unfortunate that those who would gladly purchase say the Indy > expansion pack(ICR1)for example cannot because it is no longer for sale > would have to resort to so-called piracy to obtain it.Sure there are > agreements between various parties but it seems stupid to not allow it > to be made available for download by Papy themselves or by a 3rd > party.As someone stated here last week Sim racers make up a very small > percentage of the software buying public.Taking that into account I > can't see any substantial profit loss by Papy,Nascar,Indycar er CART or > anyone else by making it available.We're not talking about Micro$oft > Office here.After all it's not like Papy is going to release another ICR > sim anytime soon.And even if they were what better way to encourage > customer loyalty than to make un-obtainable add-ons obtainable.I'm sure > most in this NG would appreciate it and take it into account when > considering a future software purchase.JMO > Steve at RXspeed7 racingThe first thing you need to do is clean up your messages. There are young
folks out there that read the news too. The four letter words just show
your limited vocabulary. As for posting tracks, there are legal reasons
for not being allowed to. Papyrus has contracts with the Indy and NASCAR
people. If the conteacts are not followed, Papyrus/Sierra are in for a big
time in court. The same applies to people on the net. If you want to post
Indy or Daytona, you better have lots of money, 'cause it's goning to cost
you.
Tim Farley
<
WELL, then the answer is not to post them on the internet but to e-mail
them to interested parties. I wish the big game companies and all the
tracks luck in enforcing this on the internet. <G>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------
Jason Nichols
Commissioner
SportSim Football League
http://members.aol.com/jn141414/ssfl.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
This is a good point but It wont work there was the big deal w/ the pits
when they almost got sued for having Daytona for N1 and were going to
release it. Personally I think that we all need to leave the licence stuff
up to Sierra/Papy to worry about. If we find a way to make tracks we won't
be able to post them on the net. There were converted tracks for N1 that
started off as whole tracks then due to the request of Papy they had to be
instructions so you could convert them yourself. And now for N2 the same
we have convertors for Daytona and Texas and soon the calif one will be on
the net.
