Atari2600guru

Has to be. I'm not aware of any other project Imagic had going at the time, and it's the only (known) title to have gone unreleased. My copy of Cubicolor has a similar label under the Cubicolor one that says "Balloon Race". It wouldn't show up in a picture though because you can barely read it through the cubicolor label since they are right on top of each other.

Edtris 2600 was the first homebrew game, but depending on how you define "homebrew", there was a release before that. In 1994 Ed Federmeyer (who programmed Edtris 2600) made and sold a cartridge called "SoundX (with Dazzle Demo 1)". He wrote SoundX to demonstrate the sound capabilities of the 2600 and make it easy to select sounds to put in his games that he planned on programming. Once he finished programming SoundX, he posted to rec.games.video.classic asking for advice and materials for making some SoundX cartridges to help out other aspiring programmers. I had just bought out a warehouse of Atari games and had a ton of Imagic cartridges. I recommended that he use the Imagic cartridges since they are easy to open and put back together (no sliding dust cover). I ended up sending him some Imagic cartridges and he made and sold about 20 copies of SoundX (I don't remember the exact number). It came with a four-page instruction booklet and no box. Each cartridge got a serial number that was actually programmed into the software and shows up on the screen. Also, each label had a hand-written serial number, date, and Ed's signature. Ed gave me serial number one since I helped him out with his project. After making those cartridges, Ed decided he didn't want to mess with cartridge making anymore, so he partnered with Hozer to sell SoundX and later Edtris 2600. Ed made a similar program called "Custom Color Demo" that demonstrated the colors of the 2600 (I think that was the same as Dazzle Demo 1 except that it has Ed's name on the screen in front of the color demo). I think he only made two cartridges of this and it was never publicly available. He made one cartridge for himself and I commissioned him to make one for me that says "John Earney" on the screen with the color demo going in the background (which I thought was the coolest thing). I took a picture, but I dont' see how to attach it to the post... John

Was this 2600 version based on code written by TNT Games in the '80's, or is it 100% homebrew (just the concept based on the old game)? Just curious because I'm trying to collect all the 2600 unreleased prototype reproductions... Thanks, John

Ah, my young NTSC apprentice, you have yet to learn a great deal about the true value of 2600 collecting, I see Cheers, Marco Marco, I am your father. LOL Now that was freakin' hillarious!!!

Ahh - so it was glued to the front (I was wondering how they attached it.) Does the box have any lettering/text on the sides/spines of the box? I'm asking because I was wondering if the box was actually sold that way for Gauntlet, or if a spare Answer box was used with the Gauntlet manual. Thanks for the info. Steve It just says "Answer Software" on the side. I don't think anyone in their right mind, would rip Malagai instructions off the box and then proceed to glue Gauntlet instructions onto it. I've had a mint shrinkwrapped Malagai for close to 10 years. I always thought the stuff on the front of the box was printed on the box, but after reading this thread I checked it out. Sure enough, there are instructions there! But on mine it is really really hard to tell the difference. Anyway, I just wanted to point out that this thing didn't look like a kludge when it was originally sold shrinkwrapped. Also I don't think this was mentioned yet, but mine has a Malagai sticker on one side of the box. John

I checked my loose cart collection and found the following Atari text labels with date codes: Blackjack: 492R Circus Atari: 331R Football: 331R (stamped upside down) Fun With Numbers: 492R Maze Craze: 331R Video Olympics: 321

Man, you guys are good. I just took a close look at the cart and compared it to an Outer Space. Turns out my cart is a manufacturing error. The main label (with the part number) is for Outer Space and the end label is for Space Combat. (I'm not sure which game it actually is since my only power supply busted recently.) Is anyone keeping track of these manufacturing errors? I'm sure the GLOLV is missing a bunch of them.

Nope.

I don't have that one either.

I wrote the Giant List of Atari 2600 Label Variations. I don't have any of these that have the "?" in the number. I assume someone told me about them but they looked strange and I couldn't get confirmation. Nobody had digital cameras back then and very few people had scanners, so it made it difficult to confirm these types of things. The only one on this list that I have is Space Combat 99803, which I see someone else has already confirmed.

Wow, this is fascinating! Christophero Sly, that was a great idea to put this list together. I have a bunch of picture labels with no date codes, so I put those in the list also. Here's what I have: Adventure: no date code Arcade Pinball: no date code Basketball: no date code Blackjack: 132 Chase: no date code Defender (orange): 422 Defender (red): 222 & no date code Demons to Diamonds: 282 Dodger Cars: no date code Haunted House: no date code Math Gran Prix: 422 Maze: 122 & no date code Missile Command: 222 Outer Space: 242 Pac Man (yellowish text, more picture showing): 132 & 182 Pac Man (orange text, less picture showing): 092 & no date code Space Combat: 132 space Invaders: no date code Speedway II: 222 & no date code Star Raiders: 442 Stellar Track: no date code Submarine Commander: 222 Warlords: 402 Yars Revenge (red): 142 Yars Revenge (orange): 222 & no date code John

In a different discussion topic, Thomas Jentzsch suggested that we turn the “Giant List of Atari 2600 Label Variations” into a WIKI-based list. I still don’t have a clear idea of what is possible with a WIKI list, but I’ve heard it will allow the general public to make additions to the list and basically turn it into a living document maintained by the community. Tempest (the current maintainer of the list) and I (the original author) both like the idea. Albert is willing to entertain the idea of hosting it at AtariAge (but first he wants to look into what it’ll take to set up a WIKI server). So I want to start a discussion here to see what the community would like to see in a WIKI label variation list. Here are some features that have been proposed: * Web-based interface that allows searches. * Users able to add new variations to the list as they find them. * Users able to log how many of each variation they own so we can compile an accurate rarity of each variation. * Users able to add images for each variation. * Users able to print out the whole list if they want to. * Ability to do separate lists for boxes, cartridges, and instructions. Any other ideas? Also, what information is missing in the current label variation list? I’ve heard suggestions of adding the variations of the instruction booklets. And some people want a unique identifier added before each variation so that it’s easy to reference label variations in sale lists. Is this information best added before converting the list to WIKI, or is it easy to add it later on? We’ll need to come up with a way to ensure data integrity. Presumable there would need to be a few “moderator” type users that would be able to oversee the evolution of the list. Any ideas on how to do this? Maybe we only allow new additions if there is an image posted at the same time that the label variation is added to the list. Then the moderators could check the recent additions to verify that the descriptions were appropriate. And it would probably be good to prevent the general public from deleting anything. I’m hoping that someone with WIKI experience will have some insight into what would be easy to do and what would be hard to do. Also, if there is anyone here who is willing to convert the text list into a WIKI list and get it operational on AtariAge, that would be great. I’m hoping that a few people can put in some work to give the WIKI list life and then we can see how it evolves. Hopefully it’ll evolve into something really cool that none of us anticipated. Please post your thoughts and suggestions.

I don't know what a WIKI based list is. Can you explain what it is and how they work? Do you have any examples that I can check out? It sounds like a WIKI list may be some online database that people contribute to??? I thought an online database-based list would be a PHENOMINAL effort to put together, but that is exactly what I've always wanted for my list! Man, I'm getting excited about this! Okay, so here's my absolutely ideal vision for my list: * Web based interface * Searchable * Users able to print out the whole list if they want to. * Free to anyone * Contributions can be added by anyone. (Though we'd probably need a "moderator" type person to ensure data integrity.) * Each user can enter how many of each label variation they have, so we can figure out the rarity of them all. * Each variation can have a link to an image of the variation. * Ablity to do seperate lists for boxes, cartridges, and instructions. Is this possible? How hard would it be to implement? Anyone have experience doing this? Man, if we could get this set up (preferably at AtariAge), that would be my dream come true!!! John

Then I think my actions have been appropriate. You are exploiting my work for your own gain without my permission. You will never have my permission to use my list. The morality of what you are doing disgusts me. I hope you get no support from the community. Please remove my name from your list. I don't want to be associated with you. John

I have spent the last few days reflecting on this whole situation. A lot of things didn’t make sense to me. Why are people taking Phil’s side on this when he’s the one plagiarizing my work? Why did everyone jump on my case when I stood up and said “Hey, this guy’s plagiarizing my work”? Why does everyone in the forum think I’m a stubborn asshole? (It’s a bad sign when you think everyone else is crazy.) I would like very much for someone to take over my list. It is a great compliment for someone to want to spend time continuing work that I can’t do anymore. How did it come about that I’m so passionate about not letting Phil work on my list? I spent some time talking to old friends about the situation and I spent quite a bit of time meditating on it. I re-read all the posts and emails and I spent some quality time with my kids (which helped put things in perspective). I think I have sorted everything out. My conclusion is that if Phil truly believed that the list was “public domain”, then I am the one who has been an asshole. Let me start by saying that Phil, I want to make peace with you and I’m sure now that you’re not the devil that I made you out to be. And I want to thank everyone for posting here. A lot of the posts that you guys made helped me to sort this out. I need to start with describing my perspective as the events unfolded. I don’t remember Phil from when he emailed me his contributions, so my first impression of him was from reading his forum posts and what he had done on his website. Everyone here knows in gory detail that it was a bad first impression. I was upset that he was tweaking my list (adding IDs) for the sole reason of making it easier for him to sell games out of his store. I was furious that he had removed all credits, effectively given himself credit, and posted some false history to cover his tracks. Being a comic and collectibles dealer, I knew he was exposed to collector’s guides from “mature” hobbies which showed every miniscule detail of each item and what it was worth. There is no similar price guide for 2600 collecting. I figured he must be positioning himself to publish such a guide sometime in the future when the community had forgotten about the true history of the list and everyone assumed that he was responsible for writing it. (That is the only reason I could think of for him removing all the credits and posting a false history of the list.) I was upset that he had removed the credits because I think everyone who ever works on something should be given credit for what they contributed. It is impossible to design something from the ground up and work on it for as long as I did without feeling like it is your work of art. The list is something that I’m very proud of doing. When Phil more or less erased my name from the history and removed my credits, it felt like he had walked into my living room and stolen it from me. I’m sure it’s hard to fully understand this unless you’ve been in a similar situation. And then as if stealing it wasn’t enough, he beats it up and then tells everyone what a cool guy he is for taking over this thing that’s in much need of repair. So then I’m just livid that this guy would do all this. I email Matt asking if Phil had asked his permission to update the list. Just as I suspected, Matt says that Phil hadn’t asked permission. So one night I email Phil and state rather bluntly that I am the author of the list, that he’s violating my copyright, and that he needs to remove my list from his website immediately. The next morning I get a short, friendly private message from Phil saying he’s updating the list. I figure this sleazebag is trying to cover his ass by playing innocent, so he’s pretending that he hasn’t seen my email yet. Later that day, Phil responds to my original email by telling me to piss off and that he has a right to update the list because he had emailed some contributions to it back in the 90’s. (Phil, I know you’ll disagree with my portrayal of your emails, but keep in mind that this was my perspective as things unfolded and I was raging pissed.) I write a long email back to Phil justifying why I own the rights to the list. I tell him I don’t want him editing my list and I ask him what he wants. He replies that he wants to have the ID on each item and he wants variations added when something in his inventory doesn’t match one of the descriptions. And then he tells me that he’s going to do it with or without my permission, but he’d prefer to have my permission when he did it. So now I’m even more pissed at him and I think he’s even more of an immoral devil than I thought. There were a couple more emails, but basically I gave him a suggestion that he didn’t like and he gave a suggestion that I didn’t like and then the conversation ended. I’m feeling totally violated by this guy. So a week goes by and he hasn’t removed the edited list from his website. At this point it’s become more of a question of principles than anything else. I couldn’t live with myself if I let some thief blatantly steal my list and then use it as he pleased. So I decided to make a stand for what I believe in. While he had done something illegal since he had violated my copyright, I recognized that suing him over a list would be absurd. I decided that the most appropriate course of action would be to expose what this guy did in the forums. That way at least some of the collecting community would know the true history of what had happened and would understand that this guy was a thief. You all know the rest of the story. Moycon, you asked what it takes to be worthy of updating a list. Thinking about this question helped me realize why I was so hell-bent on not letting Phil update the list. Here is my answer to the question: To be worthy of updating a document all you need is permission from the person who wrote the document. It’s pretty obvious when you stop to think about it. Yet I think in many ways this may be the root of most of the issues here. I now recognize that it is quite possible that Phil didn’t think he needed to get permission, so of course he didn’t ask. (Matt, thank you for posting your opinion about the public domain thing.) Personally, I simply can’t imagine the idea of not asking permission from an author before taking over their work under any circumstances. But I do recognize that different people see things in different ways. From my perspective, only an immoral person with bad intentions would try to sneak behind someone’s back and do that. The fact that Phil removed all the credits and advertised a deceptive history of the list in my mind was absolute proof that the guy was up to no good. I now admit that if Phil truly didn’t think that he needed to ask permission to update the list, then his only error was the history/credits. This is forgivable. Re-reading FireTiger’s posts also helped me figure out why I didn’t want Phil updating the list. FireTiger asked the hypothetical question: If Phil removes the edited list and then asks persmission to update it, would I let him? I answered that I would forgive him for the acts he had committed if he removed the edited list. Then I said I would not let him update the list because I didn’t think he was the appropriate person. As I was reflecting on this, I asked myself why did I think he was an inappropriate person at the time? I remember my impression of Phil when I posted the message: I thought he was an immoral person who had no respect other people’s copyrights (both because of his initial actions and then because he refused to stop editing my list). I didn’t think he cared about the best interests of the community because he didn’t use the latest version and he wanted to tweak my list (by adding ID numbers) for the sole reason of making it easier to sell games on his website. I thought he was initially intent on taking over my list so that he could sell it at a later date. I thought he was clueless about basic document control issues. And I took it personally that he had removed my name from the list after all the work I had put into it. Given all this I decided that just because this loser of a person types a few words (“Is it okay if I edit your list”), that doesn’t mean I should have to give up ownership of this list that I’d worked so hard on. It was a matter of principle. Actions speak louder than words, and I felt that his actions indicated that he had intentions to do all the things that I wanted to protect the list from (selling it, poor data management, and behaving in the interests of himself rather than the good of the community). I re-read all of the emails between Phil and me. Both of us said some things that did nothing but piss off the other person. Not surprising given the circumstances. If Phil were the devil that I had made him out to be, then I don’t think I was out of line. But I’ll take Phil’s word for it that he honestly didn’t think he needed permission to update the list. If his only offense was making some poor judgment about the credit removal and false history, then I was much more of an asshole than he was in the emails. So Phil, I want to apologize for that. I want to respond to only one thing that has been posted here recently. Phil, in my emails I never intended to threatened you. If you took something as a threat, then that was a miscommunication. I think Phil made some mistakes, and I forgive him for them. I made some mistakes, and I hope that Phil forgives me for them. If Phil thought the list was public domain, I feel that I am more at fault than Phil for this predicament because he made a better attempt at working things out in our emails. I feel bad about that. So Phil, you have my permission to update the list under the following conditions: 1) I would like you to pledge to never sell the list. 2) I would like to write a statement to be put in the header indicating that the list belongs to the collecting community and it will be forever available as a free download. I want it to state that all past and future maintainers of the list must agree to this. (If that is okay with you, Matt.) 3) I would like to write a “terms of use” statement to be put in the header that clearly states: a) Anyone may put an unedited copy of the list on their website or otherwise distribute it as long as they are not making a profit by it. b) Anyone may edit the list for their own personal use as long as the edited version isn’t distributed. This is so people can use it to keep track of their collections. c) Only one person can be the current maintainer of the list. d) All updates to the list must be sent to the current maintainer of the list. e) Only the current maintainer of the list can designate someone as the next maintainer of the list. If it is impossible to contact the current maintainer (they died or something), then contact the previous maintainer, etc. 4) I would like you to leave the list in its original wording with all the original terms and nomenclature. I think it was well-written and people have been using this list for 11 years. It would be silly to change things. 5) I would like to see the credits left intact. Everyone who contributes to this project should get credit for their work right down to the guy who only emails in one new variation. 6) I would like you to use Matt’s version 7.5 of the list as your starting point and then add your stuff to that. This is the safest way to ensure that you don’t accidentally miss some of the variations that Matt added. And I like Matt’s formatting better than mine. He had the company names alphabetized (mine has Atari in the wrong place), and all the cartridges for each company are alphabetized rather than being sorted by model number. He also removed Craig’s rarity, which I think is a good idea (people can go to AtariAge for that). These six conditions address all of the reasons that I copyrighted my list. So if Phil and Matt agree to these conditions, then I will be willing to relinquish all of my copyrights on the list under the condition that Matt also relinquishes his copyrights on the list. Thank you all for reading this. Phil and Matt, I hope you find my conditions agreeable. John

FireTiger, I am sorry, but I don't clearly understand your question. If Phil removes his edited list from his web site, then I will forgive him for what he did. Regardless of what he does, in my opinion he his not an appropriate person to maintain the list. I think I have clearly stated my reasoning. And I think I have a say in the matter since I wrote the list and I hold the copyright. I would point out that this list is not something that is in dire need of maintinance. I think it is about 95% complete in terms of listing all the design changes of the cartridge labels. I have absolutely no problem with him using the list to sell games. That is good for him and good for the community. I do not think it is appropriate to make edits to a down-revision version and publish the updated down-rev version as the latest copy. This is common sense and one of the first rules of document control. I told Phil that he could keep a down-rev version of the list on his web site if that would help him keep track of his inventory/sale list. However, I told him that I didn't want him to edit the list. I gave him a suggestion of how he could make his inventory/sale list work without editing the list. He rejected the idea because he wanted to edit the list. He had two reasons to want to edit the list: 1) To add an identification code for each label variation so he could reference it in his sale list. 2) To add new label variations to the list. I have clearly stated why I don't want him to do #2. I'm willing to give in on #1 as long as: a) The list he keeps on his web site is otherwise unedited and has all the credits attached. b) He puts some verbage before the list saying that his copy of the list may not be the latest version and has been edited to show identification numbers for each variation to facilitate selling games at his store. c) He puts a link to the latest version of the list. d) He does not claim to be an author or maintainer of the list. e) He agrees to not attempt to take over control of the list without authorization. John

Tempest, First let me say very sincerely that I’m sorry that you got dragged into this mess. You did an excellent job as maintainer of the list. My memory of our agreement is fuzzy also. I would guess that I asked you to keep all the information in the header intact (credits, copyright info, contributors), which you did (some of that info got moved to the footer, which is perfectly fine with me). Had you found someone to take over the list, I would have trusted your judgment without question. Fighting about the list is the last thing I want to do also. I hope things get straightened out quickly and this thread dies. I attempted to get things straightened out through email before going public on the matter because I really don’t like the bad vibes either, especially in a community as close-knit as the 2600 community. I’m not sure what “public domain” means, but the list is certainly freely available for anyone to download or put on their web site. I don’t intend to ever sell the list or make any money off of it. I want it to remain freely available to the public. I copyrighted the list to maintain some control over it. The control that I wanted was: 1) I didn’t want anyone else to try to sell the list, and, 2) some revision control was needed (meaning only one person should be editing the list at any time and they need to be editing the latest version of the list). I guess what I’m saying is that it is public domain in that anyone can download and use it. But since it is copyrighted by you and me, it is common sense that people shouldn’t edit it and redistribute it without contacting one of us first. Sku_u, Here are the problems that I see here: Problem #1: The current version of the list has Matt listed as the current maintainer and a copyright holder. Right next to Matt’s name is his current email address. As Matt and I both stated, Phil did NOT contact Matt until one month after Phil had been distributing his version of the list and advertising himself as the maintainer of the list. It wasn’t until I emailed Phil that he initiated contact with Matt. Problem #2: The list that Phil edited had me listed as the author and a copyright holder. Right next to my name was my current email address. He did not contact me to ask permission to update the list. Our first interaction was when I contacted him through email after discovering what he was doing. This was about a month after he posted his version of the list on his web site and started the AtariAge discussion. Am I the only person here that sees a problem with editing and redistributing copyrighted material without first getting permission from the copyright holders? Problem #3: Phil essentially stripped out all the credits to the list. You are right that on his website he gave credit to some of the people involved in creating the list. However, he distorted the facts so much that the information he provides is in fact discrediting. If you look at the actual list that he posted on his website, the only person besides himself that he credits with making the list is Craig Pell. He is quick to point out that Craig can no longer be contacted at the address listed. As I stated in my original post, the only involvement that Craig had was providing a list of cartridges that were made for the 2600. (This information is clearly stated in the header/footer of my list.) So anyone that copies the list from Phil’s website is now distributing a list that only has one contactable person, Phil, listed as the creator of the list. In his web page’s introduction to the list, the only other person that is mentioned as having something to do with the list is me (no contact information provided). All he says is he believes that I may have added a rarity index before each label variation. This is in contrast to the current list which credits (with email addresses): Me as original author and copyright holder Matt as contributing author, current maintainer, and copyright holder Craig as creator of the list of cartridges The 33 people who have emailed contributions over the years. Problem #4: Phil was advertising on the AtariAge forum that he was now the maintainer of the list and that he had the latest version. Be it conscious or not, this is a move towards discrediting the “outdated” versions of the list which give all the appropriate credits. It is also a move towards boosting the credibility of his list, which only really lists himself as owner of the list (if you consider Craig as out of the picture). It is very important to me that I be listed as the author and a copyright holder, not only because I spent 8 years and thousands of hours generating the list, but because I want to be sure that it remains free to the public. If my list gets “overwritten” by Phil’s which doesn’t credit me, then after a few years, I may have no say in the matter if he chooses to take it out of the public domain and start selling it. Problem #5: I don’t think Phil updated the latest version of the list. I’m pretty sure that he added his updates to version 6.2 of the list. If this is true, then all the work that Matt did up through version 7.5 is down the tubes if Phil’s list is advertised as the latest version. This would not be in the best interest of the community. Version 6.2 had a rarity listed for each label variation which is something that Phil wanted on his web site to help justify different prices for different label variations. I may be wrong here, and I apologize if I am, but the formatting and content of Phil’s list is more consistent with version 6.2 than it is with version 7.5 (Phil’s list has Atari listed first, each cartridge has a rarity listed, each label variation has a rarity listed). Problem #6: Phil has not removed the edited version of the list from his web site and he hasn’t even agreed to stop editing my list! It is a no-brainer that he is violating my copyright. From the very first contact that I had with Phil I have only asked him to do one thing: Remove his unauthorized version of my list from his web site. He has not done it, and that is why I started this thread. I understand that you see this list as a publicly available list that should be updated for the benefit of the community. I agree, but I think there are a few requirements: 1) Only one person can be in charge of the list at once. This is so that two people aren’t editing the list at the same time. (Phil did not do this because he didn't contact Matt before taking over.) 2) The person who is maintaining the list needs to act in the best interest of the label variation collecting community. (I’m not sure if Phil did this because of the version 6.2 vs. version 7.5 thing.) 3) The list must always contain the credits for everyone who has made the list possible. (Phil did not do this.) 4) The list must always be freely available to the public. 5) The person who maintains the list must respect other people’s copyrights. (Phil did not do this.) I hope you see my perspective that this is a list that I spent 8 years and thousands of hours creating. This list is my baby, and I want to make sure that it is maintained by responsible people. I would love it if an honest and detail-oriented label variation collector wanted to take over the maintenance of the list and maintain it for the benefit of the community. But based on his actions, I don’t think Phil is an appropriate person to take over control of the list. This whole issue would end immediately if Phil would just agree to quit plagiarizing my list. It’s that simple. I would forget that this whole thing happened. I would vote for removing this whole discussion from the forum record as long as the misinformation was cleared up and the plagiarization stopped. I have spent far too much time dealing with this issue. I hope it goes away quickly. I am sorry that I have been a pain in the ass about it, but I couldn’t live with myself if I didn’t stand up for my principles. I hope I am not way off base making these posts. Phil, You made a mistake. I forgive you. I was terse and impolite in my first emails without fully explaining myself. Maybe things would have turned out differently if I had been more polite. I hope you forgive me. Please stop distributing edited versions of my list so we can put this behind us. In email I think I gave you a reasonable suggestion of how to use an unedited copy of my list to sell your label variations. John

Here is a copy of what Phil had on his web site when I posted the first message of this thread. John ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This page is just for reference purposes. I did not create this list, but I have contributed to it over the years, and as I come across other variations, I will list them. The numbers shown as the rarity before each version is not my opinion, but that of John Earney I believe. The list was originally created by Craig Pell, but I don't think his links work any longer. I will continue to maintain this list as long as this website is up and running. I've added letters next to the label variations, and numbers next to the box variations. I am doing this to use as a reference for which version I am selling. The prices for the various labels are from my experience on acquiring them. So, if I have 20 of a particular title, and they have 2 label variations, the rarer of the two will be priced higher than the more common. Most Atari labels made with early changes will usually have the higher value, along with the last versions, which were probably made in limited supply due to the dying out of the 2600. Combat, for example, is the most common cartridge, though on this list, there are 17 variations of the title. So though you may come across many of them, some of the label variations will be extremely rare and possibly extremely valuable. Supply and demand will dictate prices. Labels and boxes may not be in the order they were released, but for the most part should be, with special versions being listed at the end of the particular game. Sometime in the future, hopefully by the end of 2004, I will be adding a 3rd part to the list; instruction manuals and their variations. I am surprised that this was not done in the first place, since there are several versions of instruction manuals for many of the games. You may consider opening this page in a separate window to compare my sale list to the label list. Trying to complete an Atari collection is next to impossible, and trying to collect all the variations is even more so. You may consider limiting your label variations to a particular company, such as Atari, or Sears or Activision. Sears games are fun if you can collect a Text and a picture version (if made), since there are only 56 or so games. It's also always fun to actually see what you can find in the wild. +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + | ******************************************************* | | **** The Giant List of 2600 Label Variations **** | | ******************************************************* | | Originally done by Craig Pell, though I don’t think these addresses are valid | | WWW home page at http://www.clark.net/pub/vgr | | or you can contact him via E-mail at [email protected] | | | | To update this list on my website, contact me at [email protected] | | I will try and correct any mistakes and add any new info as I come across it. | | I've changed many things to update the times, since this list began in the 1990s. | | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- That is the end of the header. The footer from my list was deleted. John

I am John Earney, the original author of the “Giant List of Atari 2600 Label Variations”. I am making this post to address the issue of Philflound (Phil Dispenza) plagiarizing my label variations list. I have three reasons for posting this: 1) Some misinformation has been posted on the forums relating to the history of the list and I want to clear that up. 2) I want the people who choose to support Phil’s efforts to understand exactly what they are supporting. 3) I want to stand up for what I believe to be morally right, and I believe this is the most appropriate way to do that. I will attempt to only state facts related to the issue without putting my emotional slant on things. I will start with the history of the list: Craig Pell, who was commonly known by his handle "VGR", researched and assembled a list of Atari 2600 cartridges. It was widely distributed as a text document so that fellow collectors could keep track of what they owned and what they still needed. Craig put his best guess at the rarity of each cartridge on the list as a reference. This list served as the first online collector's guide and was very popular among the online Atari 2600 collecting community. In 1993 there were absolutely no references that dealt with label variations. I wanted to make a collector's guide for label variation collectors. To start with, I needed a list of all Atari 2600 cartridges. I asked Craig if I could use his list of cartridges as the cartridge list that I would add my label variations to. He said I could use his list as long as I kept his credits in the header as the creator of the cartridge list. I then very carefully examined every cartridge that I ever got my hands on and documented all the differences that I saw. It started with documenting that some cartridges have pictures and others have text. Then noticing that there are two text fonts, which meant I had to go back and recheck everything I could still get my hands on and edit the list. Then later on, I noticed other things like the size of the ® symbol and then I’d have to go back and recheck & edit again. It was a very time consuming process when there was no basis to start with. I had to start with how to refer to the two labels that are typically on each cartridge because there was no standard yet (in discussions people were using ambiguous terms). There are many little details in the list that look trivial, but took a huge amount of effort and patience to find and document. After I had a significant list going, I posted it to rec.games.video.classic so that other collectors could have a label variations reference. When I did this, I copyrighted the list as my own work, but distributed the raw text version of the list so that others could easily use it to keep track of their label variation collections. I asked that other label variation collectors email me with any new label variations that they find. I got some responses from other collectors. Anyone who contributed up to about 10-15 variations was listed as a contributor, and anyone who submitted more than about 15 were listed as major contributors. In each case I had to evaluate each variation and interpret what the person was saying. People didn’t have digital cameras back then, so it was much harder to verify things and it often involved a few emails back and forth. Once I got all the communication issues worked out with each submittal, I had to edit them so they conformed to the nomenclature and formatting of the list. I hope you understand that this was a lot of work. All this time I was documenting every cartridge I could get my hands on (which was thousands because I was a big dealer back then). With each big label format discovery (such as the size of the ®), or when I had made a significant number of additions, I would publish a copyrighted new “version” of the list to the collecting community (which at the time meant posting it to the usenet newsgroup rec.games.video.classic). After a while the web showed up. I made one of the first web pages devoted exclusively to the Atari 2600 and devoted my site to label variations. I had a big image archive with samples of many of the label types and I kept the current version of my list posted there. By 2001, I had gotten to version 6.2, which was about 70 pages long. (Version 6.2 of my list is still on the web at: http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogames/cons...ariations.html). I had developed ALL the nomenclature and categorization methods of the label types (which took a heck of a lot of work because of all the complicated edits I had to do). I also single-handedly organized this effort and did all the work of collecting the data from the community. Out of all the label variations listed, about 80% were entirely my work and the remaining 20% were a joint effort between me and the various contributors (but keep in mind that even that 20% was a lot of work for me). I had spent eight years and thousands of hours of my spare time working on the list. When my first child came along it was clear that I should spend my spare time with my family rather than spend the time on the label variation list and most other collecting activities. I closed down my web site. Luckily, a friend and fellow label enthusiast Matt Reichert offered to maintain my list (you may know Matt as Tempest on AtariAge). I think he also salvaged some of the label variation images from my web site before I closed it down. Matt devoted part of his excellent www.atariprotos.com web site to label variations and posted the latest version of the list there. He made some brilliant and much-needed formatting changes and added some more variations. His latest version is 7.5. The master copy of the list is still on his web site at http://www.atariprotos.com/other/labelvar/labelvar.htm. There is also a copy of the list archived in the reference section of this page on AtariAge: http://www.atariage.com/2600/archives/inde...p?SystemID=2600. The Giant List of Atari 2600 Label Variations is a free text document that is available to anyone who wants to download it. It is distributed in text format so that people can easily track their own inventory of label variations. The header and footer clearly state that I am the author and primary copyright holder and it states my current email address. It also clearly states that Matt is currently in charge of maintaining the list, that he is the secondary copyright holder, and it lists his current email address. The footer goes on to give credit to all the other people who made the list possible including Craig Pell, who made the cartridge list, and the 33 other people who have contributed label variations over the years. So that is the true history of the list. Now here are the recent events that spurred this posting: Phil decided that he wanted to be in charge of the Giant List of Atari 2600 Label Variations so that he could use it to sell label variations out of his comic/collectibles store/website. Without asking me or Matt permission, Phil downloaded a copy of the list and removed all the credits and copyright information. He added some variations that weren’t on the list and then added an identification tag to each variation in the list so that he could easily reference it in his sale listings. He posted his edited version of the list on his web site along with some false history of the list (http://gpdcomics.tripod.com/id74.html). He then initiated an AtariAge discussion forum (http://www.atariage.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=56046&highlight=label+variations) where he posted more false information and announced that he had taken ownership of an old label variations list and would be maintaining it from now on. He asked others to send him updates to the list as they found new variations so he could make the list more complete. When I found out about this, I contacted Matt and confirmed that Phil had not gotten permission to do this. I then contacted Phil and informed him that removing the credits and copyright information from my list, editing it to suit his needs, taking ownership of the list without permission, and redistributing the list through his website was both immoral and illegal. I asked him to remove it from his website immediately. We had one week of negotiations through email. We were unable to come to a mutual agreement. I did not want him to distribute a copy of my list that he had edited. He wanted a list with an identification tag on each variation to make selling easier and he wanted all the new variations that he finds added. It has been a week since our discussions ended and he has not removed the edited list from his web site, so I decided to post this message. I will follow up with a copy of what Phil had on his web site when I posted this message… Thank you for reading this, John

I think I read that when these EPROMS were made, they were specified to hold their program for at least 20 years. Personally, I haven't had any die on me...

If you ever want to sell or trade that Saboteur proto let me know. I'm trying to assemble all the known versions for my collection. Tempest I have up to 61 Atari 2600 prototypes depending on how far you stretch the meaning of "prototype". One of them is a Saboteur EPROM board dated "6/20". I put a little note with it that says "no subtitle, rocket does not say SABATEUR". Do you still need that one? Also have some 2600 prototype boxes: Tempest Realsports Basketball Dukes of Hazzard Dumbo's Flying Circus Donnald Duck's Speedboat Frog Pond Crazy Climber Swordquest Waterworld Big Bird's Egg Catch

Sure. Why hadn't they put it in the database before now? (Finally got my signature working...)

http://www.digitpress.com/archives/arc00084.htm Cool! Thanks CPUWIZ! Any idea how many boxed ones are in the hands of collectors? I know there were three boxed ones that were found in a thrift store in about '94... To be honest, I don't even know who this one belongs to. That one's mine. It's one of the three found in '94.

My vote would be Fun With Numbers. It was released in text format just before they switched to the picture style labels. And it was an old game (Basic Math) that sucked, so the volumes probably weren't too high.

http://www.digitpress.com/archives/arc00084.htm Cool! Thanks CPUWIZ! Any idea how many boxed ones are in the hands of collectors? I know there were three boxed ones that were found in a thrift store in about '94...