From: Anders Carlsson (anders.carlsson_at_mds.mdh.se)
Date: 2004-06-18 12:16:24
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Baltissen, GJPAA (Ruud) wrote: > The system-ROMs are another matter. From your message, it seems that the people in charge are concerned to do the "right" things and make proper judgements and decisions. Would it make any sense to look up how Amstrad signs deals with individual developers (as I understand it) and make someone from Tulip contact Amstrad to learn more how they both make money with the e-m@iler and at the same time doesn't shut down the legal Speccy scene? Not that I'm affected, but was anything said on newly produced software which some third party is selling? Does these have to sign an agreement with Tulip and pay a license fee, or will the third party market still be unrestricted? Since you mention that anyone selling hardware utilizing ports, protocol and ROM code should pay a fee, I would suspect this applies to software too? Great announcement otherwise. Hope things evolve for the good and not just turn hostile if Tulip, Ironstone and the other partners find the market not as potentially money bringing as it sounds like they expect. -- Anders Carlsson Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.