Hatta Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I am an attorney in New York Isn't this usually followed by "but I am not your attorney, and this is not legal advice"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashjazzcat Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I am an attorney in New York Isn't this usually followed by "but I am not your attorney, and this is not legal advice"? Not , by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrop Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 I am an attorney in New York Isn't this usually followed by "but I am not your attorney, and this is not legal advice"? Not , by any chance? Funny video. No, I'm just a person interested in seeing what happens. I was disappointed in Atari for harassing an Atari enthusiast who did nothing more than show his enthusiasm for a 30 year old product by posting homemade programs written by other enthusiasts. I would have thought Atari would have been flattered that such an old product still gets attention today. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
José Pereira Posted August 15, 2011 Share Posted August 15, 2011 (edited) There's no Royalties for atari, for sure! Asfalt shop: Alfast shop Why they don't discouver this real use (abuse) of atari Logo to win Money (lots of!...) Edited August 15, 2011 by José Pereira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt Vendel Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I'm not really sure what the issue is, just taking some stabs at this: They can't do anything in regards to an emulator. the patents covering the chips has long since expired. Now if you are using Atari OS rom's in your emulator, now that would be an issue, but you can also use one of the 3rd party OS' that are better then the original Atari OS and then they can't do anything in regards to emulation. As for you developing games, they have no say as to who writes code on that platform, it was never so when the real hardware was sold starting in 1979 and it is no different today. Now I did notice one of your game screens did show an Atari Fuji logo, now that most certainly have a say in that and its use, so you should remove that and replace it with something else. Curt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt Vendel Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Kristen Keller is the head legal counsel at Atari, if he has an issue then best thing to do is to contact her regarding the issue and request specifics as to the issue(s) to remedy, I just posted an email previous to this one and most likely the only thing that can have a solid ground against pps is the use of Atari OS roms in his emulator (not the emulator itself) and the use of the Atari logo within a game(s) If you use one of the 3rd party OS images instead then the emulator is totally clear and if you remove the Atari logo and any other Atari speicific titles/names from your games and give them some other name, then that remedies that. kristen.keller@atari.com BTW - be polite and respectful, she's a reasonable person, but she is the head of Atari's legal department, so don't act like an ass, she can rain hell down on you if you piss her off. Best of luck, Curt Personally, I'd contact Curt Vendel since he has decent contacts at Atari and might be able to put it to rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 As for you developing games, they have no say as to who writes code on that platform, it was never so when the real hardware was sold starting in 1979 and it is no different today. Now I did notice one of your game screens did show an Atari Fuji logo, now that most certainly have a say in that and its use, so you should remove that and replace it with something else. It only counts; if there is some commercial background. Not sure what PPS is doing with it, but the site seems to be "non commercial". Vice Versa, ABBUC, uses the Atari Logo, and it has a commercial background. I wonder if Atari will sue the club soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 BTW - be polite and respectful, she's a reasonable person, but she is the head of Atari's legal department, so don't act like an ass, she can rain hell down on you if you piss her off. Reasonable doesn't include writing airy-fairy letters. Not replying is the best, PPS could do. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorfdbg Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Kristen Keller is the head legal counsel at Atari, if he has an issue then best thing to do is to contact her regarding the issue and request specifics as to the issue(s) to remedy, I just posted an email previous to this one and most likely the only thing that can have a solid ground against pps is the use of Atari OS roms in his emulator (not the emulator itself) and the use of the Atari logo within a game(s) If you use one of the 3rd party OS images instead then the emulator is totally clear and if you remove the Atari logo and any other Atari speicific titles/names from your games and give them some other name, then that remedies that. Thanks Curt, in that case, however, I don't quite understand their point. Yes, of course, the Atari logo would be an issue, but not a DCMA - copyright issue - it is a trademark issue. At least in Germany that is something completely different, and I believe so it is in the states. However, they don't claim having a trademark issue. They claim having a copyright issue, and lawers should know this. Strange. I neither find any original Atari ROMs on the mentioned pages. Nor emulators. Even more strange. So, in the end, I believe the best to do is really write a letter and ask what the problem is about because the email doesn't really say or explain it. Yes, of course in a polite form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorsten Günther Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Vice Versa, ABBUC, uses the Atari Logo, and it has a commercial background. I wonder if Atari will sue the club soon The ABBUC is a "gemeinnütziger eingetragener Verein", a non-profit registered association. See its statute (with a rather clumsy translation to English) here. Yet this won't save the ABBUC from Atari's legal rampage, the Atari logo used within the ABBUC logo may very well be considered a trademark infringement (IMHO, IANAL). Yet Atari would be ill-advised to persecute it's own fanbase. Thorsten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaperman Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) Yet Atari would be ill-advised to persecute it's own fanbase. One would also think it would be ill-advised for Atari to harass their fanbase too. This whole situation is just odd, given how few fans 'Big Atari' still has, even here. Either we have a situation with incompetent Atari lawyers, or mean ones. Is there a third option? I'm still hung up on the mention of the computer names themselves "Atari 400; Atari 800; Atari 800XL; Atari 130XE" Does 'Big Atari' actually even own claim to these names? My knowledge of Atari history is lacking, but I thought the computer division was sold off down a different path. Perhaps I'm mistaken though. Edited August 16, 2011 by Reaperman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatta Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 BTW - be polite and respectful, she's a reasonable person, but she is the head of Atari's legal department, so don't act like an ass, she can rain hell down on you if you piss her off. Reasonable doesn't include writing airy-fairy letters. Not replying is the best, PPS could do. Absolutely. Reasonable people don't make baseless threatening accusations to their fan base on first contact. I think the word you're looking for is "despicable" or "reprehensible". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashjazzcat Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Absolutely. Reasonable people don't make baseless threatening accusations to their fan base on first contact. I think the word you're looking for is "despicable" or "reprehensible". Quite so. Seems to me that they're the people who need Hell raining down on them. A confrontational approach in the first instance hardly inspires an overly tactful reply. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pps Posted August 16, 2011 Author Share Posted August 16, 2011 Kristen Keller is the head legal counsel at Atari, if he has an issue then best thing to do is to contact her regarding the issue and request specifics as to the issue(s) to remedy, I just posted an email previous to this one and most likely the only thing that can have a solid ground against pps is the use of Atari OS roms in his emulator (not the emulator itself) and the use of the Atari logo within a game(s) If you use one of the 3rd party OS images instead then the emulator is totally clear and if you remove the Atari logo and any other Atari speicific titles/names from your games and give them some other name, then that remedies that. kristen.keller@atari.com BTW - be polite and respectful, she's a reasonable person, but she is the head of Atari's legal department, so don't act like an ass, she can rain hell down on you if you piss her off. I don´t have any emulator at my website, only files that I programmed in the last 20 years. What I can´t understand, is why my small collection makes ATARI shooting at me? It is a long tradition using the Fuji on every of the various left fallen ATARI hardwares around the globe. For sure there are many people that used it a lot more than me. But hey, maybe there is another reason why I got that mail. I´ll see, when I have a reaction. Therefore I´ll have to do my work first. I still got no time. At this weekend, hope so. That letter must be correct, so no fast emotional thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Union NJ Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 It sounds like a blowing smoke letter let it ride till they send another.. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 It sounds like a blowing smoke letter let it ride till they send another.. Chris To answer it, polite or not, may cause some unexpected effect. It may look like someone guilty searches for an excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NuY Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 <snip> My knowledge of Atari history is lacking, but I thought the computer division was sold off down a different path. Perhaps I'm mistaken though. No. Much simplified, but essentially: Warner Atari ----> Atari Coin-Op -> bought by Namco -> | management buy out -> bought by Warner again -> sold to Midway -> | Midway name Atari Games as Midway West(I think) when Hasbro bought the other Atari | |--> Atari home computere dvn (Tramiel) > merger with JTS -> Hasbro buy-out -> Infogrames buy Hasbro -> Infogrames name themselves Atari -> Profit Disclaimer: Some of the above may be very very simplified Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
José Pereira Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Just have a look at this: Sid version of Hotel clifornia? It seems what I post... but if it is, what's the problem in trying to get POKEY, SID, YM,... of Artist songs? There's thousands out there. Is this one more sh... What's the problem in doing and show this? (That's not Instruments and a Music group promoting their work) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
José Pereira Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I know I've read it somewhere in the past. This is indeed not anything to the Song but to the way to play it. Now have a look at this: Guitar Hero Sure it was SONY about Playstation game that banned this. But this is really interesting, really interesting... I think all the Musicians guys here don't bother to be Pirates and having something like this in our A8/POKEY ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroovyBee Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Just have a look at this: Audio disabled for copyright reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
José Pereira Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I know I've read it somewhere in the past. This is indeed not anything to the Song but to the way to play it. Now have a look at this: Guitar Hero Sure it was SONY about Playstation game that banned this. But this is really interesting, really interesting... I think all the Musicians guys here don't bother to be Pirates and having something like this in our A8/POKEY ? And then we may have Nintendo over us about this: WII Nunchuck on A8 It was released in one of those A8 Meetings, remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sack-c0s Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Just have a look at this: Audio disabled for copyright reasons. you probably have to get the music sufficiently close to the original for that to happen - I must not be doing it right in that case because my 8-bit covers still work. TMR got a lazy google C&D over Reaxion from the mobile developer of the same name. I think it just took a firm but polite statement that they hadn't got a leg to stand on (without being in any way rude about it) and it was all over. Maybe that's all that's needed here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrop Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 The laws regarding the copying of copyrighted work are different than the laws regarding copying a trademark. Copyright law generally is aimed at protecting works of authorship. Trademark law is aimed primarily at preventing the use of someone else's trademark to gain a commercial advantage. Atari's letter did not mention trademark infringement, so I doubt they have a problem with the Fuji appearing in any of the programs appearing on the web page. In any case, it did not appear to me that pps was engaging in commerce, or that he was displaying the Fuji in such a way as to confuse the public into believing that Atari owns the programs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emkay Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Just have a look at this: Sid version of Hotel clifornia? It seems what I post... but if it is, what's the problem in trying to get POKEY, SID, YM,... of Artist songs? There's thousands out there. Is this one more sh... What's the problem in doing and show this? (That's not Instruments and a Music group promoting their work) I guess, both have in common, that someone was acting before turning the brains on. No law on earth is telling that it is forbidden to cover a song for a non commercial purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+pboland Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 I just got ready to respond to another thread about the same thing (different person got the letter about atari2600.org) and it was deleted in the time it took me to log in and click reply button. What's going on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts