Dave Matson says, Playing NASCAR2 is potentially illegal!!!!

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Apples and Oranges. > Multiplayer NASCAR 2 on The Zone, Heat, Kali, Kahn or any other wholly > unsupported and potentially illegal use of N2 on the net will be miles > apart the NROS on TEN for a host of reasons already mentioned here > many > times, but I will summarize:

David: Could you clarify what you mean by illegal use of N2. I cant but I guess I can believe that PAPYRUS would threaten its NASCAR 2 KALI, etc users and say they have committed some sort of a crime. Might we get a knock on the door from the PAPRYUS attorney and be sued by your company. You got my address, you've sent enough registered mail here already.. Let me be the first to be served. Don Wilshe, IVGA Note: Making a statement like that could harm those company's financially and we would all appreciate some clarification.... Don Wilshe, IVGA PS. Hope NRO is up soon...

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> Apples and Oranges. >> Multiplayer NASCAR 2 on The Zone, Heat, Kali, Kahn or any other wholly >> unsupported and potentially illegal use of N2 on the net will be miles >> apart the NROS on TEN for a host of reasons already mentioned here >> many times, but I will summarize: >Could you clarify what you mean by illegal use of N2. I cant but I >guess I can believe that PAPYRUS would threaten its NASCAR 2 KALI, etc users and say >they have committed some sort of a crime.

Why am I not surprised to see you trying to incite a riot, Don? For curiousity's sake, I'd like to know what Dave's "illegal" reference might refer to, but I seriously doubt that he is thinking of going out and suing a bunch of people who are just playing over a network. After all, NASCAR 2 supports and is intended for network play is it not? My feeling is that by saying "potentially illegal" he's probably thinking of something like trying to sell a network league as some kind of official NASCAR league or some other kind of commercial re-use of NASCAR 2 which might violate Papyrus' and NASCAR's rights in some way. While I'd be interested in hearing from Papyrus on this, unless you are a complete paranoid schizophrenic, you MUST realize that this is in all likelihood something similar to what you hear during a football broadcast ("reuse or retransmission of this broadcast without the express written prior consent of the NFL and the Miami Dolphins is expressly prohibited" or something like that). The intent is not that you can't tape the game or have friends over and show the tape as much as that you aren't to be turning it into a profit-making venture. Have you gone to the NFL and ***ed and moaned that their wording might be interpreted by some paranoid person as meaning they couldn't tape the game for later watching or even loan a copy of the tape to a friend who missed the game? Anyway, given your past history, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you're spearheading another Papyrus witch-hunt...it really does get old, Don. Contrary to popular belief, Papyrus is not made up of a bunch of killjoys who are out to destroy you. Randy

Quoted text (8 lines)

>David: >Could you clarify what you mean by illegal use of N2. I cant but I >guess I can >believe that PAPYRUS would threaten its NASCAR 2 KALI, etc users and say >they have committed some sort of a crime. Might we get a knock on the >door from >the PAPRYUS attorney and be sued by your company.

Here's a quote from Dave's response. Don neglected to add this part. The rest of the story....

Quoted text (10 lines)

>>Sorry, I should know better than to make wild statements like my >>previous message. I'm quite certain N2 online users have nothing to >>fear. I was merely speculating that it is possible that the folks who >>are charging for online use of a licensed and copyrighted game may be >>doing so illegally. I'm no lawyer, so I will leave it up to Sierra's >>legal department to determine whether Heat and the Zone can explicitly >>support multiplayer NASCAR 2 without our permission. As I'm sure you >>well know, Kahn and Kali are merely tools for using IPX networked >>products over the internet, and don't have any direct relationship >>with or explicitly advertised support of N2 as a selling point.

There ya go. Didn't the above statement clarify things for you, Don? Mike Radler Hawaii Ace League http://www.dithots.org/hal

Back off Randy!!!!! We've all seen the answer for this one, but jeez. . . Don had a legitimate question here. If Dave Matson makes a post with the words potentially illegal in it, I think it is quite correct to request a clarification. Talk about schizo.... "while I'd be interested...in all likelihood...something similar...." Are you sure about your facts Randy? What a bunch of self-righteous dribble. . . -/- Walk Walker #19 Walk Walker - turn left and go very very fast until they tell you to stop.....

Mike:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> >David: > >Could you clarify what you mean by illegal use of N2. I cant but I > >guess I can > >believe that PAPYRUS would threaten its NASCAR 2 KALI, etc users and > say > >they have committed some sort of a crime. Might we get a knock on > the > >door from > >the PAPRYUS attorney and be sued by your company. > Here's a quote from Dave's response. Don neglected to add this part. > The rest of the story.... > >>Sorry, I should know better than to make wild statements like my > >>previous message. I'm quite certain N2 online users have nothing to > >>fear. I was merely speculating that it is possible that the folks > who > >>are charging for online use of a licensed and copyrighted game may > be > >>doing so illegally. I'm no lawyer, so I will leave it up to Sierra's > >>legal department to determine whether Heat and the Zone can > explicitly > >>support multiplayer NASCAR 2 without our permission. As I'm sure you > >>well know, Kahn and Kali are merely tools for using IPX networked > >>products over the internet, and don't have any direct relationship > >>with or explicitly advertised support of N2 as a selling point. > There ya go. Didn't the above statement clarify things for you, Don?

Not all all, but thanks for input Mike. First Dave says were are doing something illegal. Than he talks about something else.. I did get a reply from Matson and he did nothing to clarify his statement. Mike, If you are doing something illegal dont you want to know what it is.. The statement POTENIALLY ILLEGA. why dont they just say what it is... Not some sort of scare tactic. This is the same ***they pulled when I talked about dial-up nascar racing at cafe's. They want it all for themselves. It's the same old Ed Martin Scare tactic's. Roll-over if it makes you feel good... I am asking the question so I can tell the IVGA members if they are doing something legal or illegal.. I owe it to them.. I dont think you would want something keep from them and find they all get sued by PAPYRUS Don > Hawaii Ace League [link lost in import]

Whatever Randy . . . Some people get so defensive. If anything, I kind of thought Don posted this tounge-in-cheek. But regardless, this IS a newsgroup and I can not think of a place where a simple clarification involving the law and that little organization Don is involved with (IVGA) is easier or less offensive than here. -/- Walk Walker #19 Walk Walker - turn left and go very very fast until they tell you to stop.....

>First of all, that is >the "reply" from the post that Don Posted yesterday!! Julian, now that I'm thinking, I see Don was just trying help inform the public of potential legal liabilities. At first I thought maybe he was trying to stir something up. My apologees. Mike Radler

>Whatever Randy . . . >Some people get so defensive. If anything, I kind of thought Don posted this > tounge-in-cheek. Are you new around here? Sure, anyone can say anything they like, but if they use poor manners they can expect to see responses like the one I wrote. And given the source and the consistent nature of his attacks on Papyrus, you'll have to excuse me if I treat it like the attack that it is. Randy

>Why dont you ask him.. He said clearly in his email that we were doing >something ILLEGAL... Cant you read. I asked for clarification.. Don, get help. Saying that something is illegal and something is "potentially illegal" are two entirely different things. Just as my taping a football game is a potentially illegal activity if I then take that tape and make money selling copies of it, or airing it in a theater and charging admission. Taping it is not illegal -- turning it into a commercial venture may be. At any rate, if you've gotten this far in life and cannot separate "potentially illegal" from "he said we are doing something something ILLEGAL" then perhaps you're beyond even the reach of most shrinks. You hope not? uh huh...you'd be jumping up and down with glee if they were...because that's the way you want them to be -- because the very pathetic truth of the matter is that your relevance these days is defined by how much you can present yourself as "defender of the little guy" against mean ole Papyrus. Randy

Randy: All I did was ask one question of Dave Matson after he posted email that we were doing something POTENIALLY ILLEGAL. I ask what was it??? Don Wilshe As of this email.. Dave Matson still hasnt told us what it is.... If he is going to make statements that can affect us. I think he should be clear. Before I was more money on NASCAR racing at KALI, KAHN, ZONE, etc. If he knows something to back up his statement he should tell us.. Let me make it simple for you randy. Dave says that you are doing something pontially illegal. Dont you want to know what it is??? Call me at (941) 283-3441 and we can talk about it... Thanks Don Wilshe And you are dead wrong.. I think Papyrus and Dave Matson are great company and a good person.. Do you think I would spend thousands of dollars on a site to slam PAPRYUS. Thats called supporting PAPYRUS.. But I dont agree with them all the time...But I do agree with them 99% of the time... It's these sort of statements that come out from time to time that need clarification.. Always appreciate your input

You guys need to get the facts straight. Dave posted first on TEN's newsgroup responding to someone's post, in which he stated "potentially illegal". Don then responded to this post asking him to clarify. Dave then responded soon after. Don posted a copy of Dave first post, and his (Don) question asking him to clarify, but didn't wait for Dave respones before he posted to RAS. I understand Don's position of wanting to know so he can go and tell all ivga members. But IMO, he should have waited for the response and posted the whole thing. BTW, don't you guys read the fine print before you bust the shrink wrap.<G> says...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >>First of all, that is > >>the "reply" from the post that Don Posted yesterday!! > >Julian, now that I'm thinking, I see Don was just trying help > >inform the public of potential legal liabilities. At first I thought > >maybe he was trying to stir something up. My apologees. > >Mike Radler > No biggie Mike..No harm done. It happens to the best of us..: ) > take care > JD

Julian, I don't need to read the post, I seen it all unfold on TEN. Don did not post first. It went like this. Dave responds to a post from another user, Don posts a question to Dave concerning his last post, Dave posts a reply. Not trying to flame anyone, I just call'em like I see'um. says... > >Don did make the story seem a little one sided. You would figure if some > >one makes a statement, you ask them to clarify it and they do, you should > >at least post that along with the rest of quote. > Read my last post.. This all happened on TEN's server.. Don posted first.. Dave > Matson replied.. Mykey gets all over Don's a$$, as usual as it seems. Mykey > posts up a part from the Dave Matson's reply.. > jd

(snip) Pmfji but the "illegality" issue actually first came up on the TEN news server some time ago. If I remember correctly , the programmers, after hearing that a Nascar2 area was being advertised on either Heat or the Zone (I forget which) began musing as to whether that was illegal as TEN has an exclusive for N2. It was kind of a side thread within a thread about the viability of N2 on those services. I am positive that that this issue is what Dave was referring to.... I imagine it gets a bit exasperating for the Papy and TEN guys having their sentences squeezed like a wet chamois. In all fairness, though I've been reading the TEN newsgroup since day one and knew what he was talking about. Perhaps Don missed those posts. Regards, Gavel

newsgroup responding to someone's post, in which he stated "potentially illegal". Don then responded to this post asking him to clarify. >> As if that's ALL that was contained in Don's post. Don't attempt to spin history, here. Don's post was incredibly confrontational. Immediately following his initial question he said (I'm paraphrasing) "I can believe that Papyrus would send Lawyers out to sue its NASCAR 2 owners" and then followed up by, rather childishly in my opinion, daring Papyrus by starting with him. It was the classic "Put up yer dukes" from Don towards Papyrus. He twisted Dave's words and then tried to make it sound like Papyrus was out to get all NASCAR users. Its really sad that anyone would come on and try to portray Don's behavior as a mere "query for clarification". ivga members. >> If you truly believe that this is Don's motivation, I've got a bridge to sell you. He later referred to Dave's comments as "Scare tactics" and said that it was because they just wanted everything for themselves. Hardly the actions and attitude of someone simply seeking to get a story for his IVGA membership. This was picking a fight plain and simple. There are a hundred other ways he could have asked Dave to clarify without acting so paranoid and confrontational. Randy Randy Magruder Staff Writer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com/