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.