Atari : A Visual History Book is now LIVE on Kickstarter

[Mclaneinc]

To stay on your car analogy, you criticize the colour of the car, you dont want anyway.

 

Sorry JoSch, that's not true, all you are doing is saying I don't want that colour..If I go in to a BMW dealer and he's got a hideous (to me) toxic green colour version there and I say "I don't like / want that colour" its still implies (by going in to ask about it) that I like the car but not the colour..

[Mclaneinc]

Darren, obviously. Just because you wouldn't do that, you can neither derive any lies or misleading statements nor that Darren is wrong. He might have his reasons, like having a demanding day job, were has to choose what he wants to do with his time, like creating a new cover, drum up more backers. But hey, it's so easy to only accept your own world view and demand of everybody else, it's the only way.

 

Of course its misleading, its not true for a start and its damn close to false advertising for another....It simply is, that's not a world view its a factual view...

 

What is with the demanding day job stuff, a KS for 30K + is a damn serious item, if you don't take the time to do it right then there's something wrong however you look at it..

[JoSch]

you are talking nonsense.

i'd be interested in a good, well-written book that was also an original piece of work.

 

fact: the people complaining that others are "finding fault with this book" will be the very first to complain about the book when it arrives...by which time it's too late.

 

here's a thing: if you promise to stop replying to me, i'll ignore this thread.

 

then, the risk is all your own. but please don't goad me into replying again.

I'll take the risk, because you accuse me of talking nonsense. So I have to answer, but never again tell me I would goad you. I don't.

You are free to take part or not. Just because I argue, you are unfair and hypercritical, doesn't mean, I'm happy to do this or enticising you to trash me.

Where, by the way, is the criticism of this , when it comes to all the flaws in my printer emulation. Nobody complains that "it doesn't work because the coding is error ridden". I have no bug or success reports, not even from the user requesting a feature, I implemented immediately.

What I see is, a unreasonable long and repeating discussion about a matter of disagreement.

And, I repeat that, the cover is fair use in my opinion. Is this an actionable violation https://jamesostafford.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/rocka-rolla-original.jpg?AFAIK, they were never sued. If the Judas Priest cover is fair use, why isn't Darren's cover?

[JoSch]

 

Of course its misleading, its not true for a start and its damn close to false advertising for another....It simply is, that's not a world view its a factual view...

 

What is with the demanding day job stuff, a KS for 30K + is a damn serious item, if you don't take the time to do it right then there's something wrong however you look at it..

You know that how?

[JoSch]

 

Sorry JoSch, that's not true, all you are doing is saying I don't want that colour..If I go in to a BMW dealer and he's got a hideous (to me) toxic green colour version there and I say "I don't like / want that colour" its still implies (by going in to ask about it) that I like the car but not the colour..

No, you are saying: "I don't want that car. And you should not buy that car, because I don't want it."

[JoSch]

Gawd...I didn't want to post but its just painful to see..

 

JoSch, how is it wrong to post that you see issues in an item, especially if the issues put you off or even if the book is not for you..

 

I don't see how its moot to raise that concern JUST because you don't want it yourself...If you critique on false issues then yes, but all of these are plain to see.

 

I've got some great friends on here, I want the best for them too, in my case Darren made me wanting the book impossible, and then the cracks in what was offered and what was real started to show...You HAVE to include the fact that Darren straight away in PRINT said it was finished and ready to go to the printers, if you just ignore that then it make's a lot of what you said just as moot for different reasons.

It is never wrong to state the issues. I object to the way, it is done in this case. Repeatedly so.

Edited May 28, 2019 by JoSch

[Mclaneinc]

No, you are saying: "I don't want that car. And you should not buy that car, because I don't want it."

 

Seriously, no its not...This is arguing for the sake of it...I don't know why...If I say I don't want that colour its purely a dislike of that colour and looking for other choices...But that is by the by, regardless of if I wanted and item, ala the book, I'm more than allowed to say why, its like seeing a 1200XL for sale but not wanting it because of the cost (likely cost) and noticing a small crack on it and telling people that "did you notice the small crack on it", according your logic that is wrong because I didn't want it in the first place..The point I would have raised is VALID because I want friend to have a heads up JUST IN CASE..

 

I really am lost as to why you are arguing every point even when its been printed BY DARREN...

 

It just comes across as being the last person posting syndrome you see in some forums..

 

Look, I am out of here, reasonable arguments I can deal with but stuff that's dropped to "I'm right" even if evidence shows otherwise are just daft..

 

Follow me JoSch and make better use of your time eh...

[JoSch]

 

Seriously, no its not...This is arguing for the sake of it...I don't know why...If I say I don't want that colour its purely a dislike of that colour and looking for other choices...But that is by the by, regardless of if I wanted and item, ala the book, I'm more than allowed to say why, its like seeing a 1200XL for sale but not wanting it because of the cost (likely cost) and noticing a small crack on it and telling people that "did you notice the small crack on it", according your logic that is wrong because I didn't want it in the first place..The point I would have raised is VALID because I want friend to have a heads up JUST IN CASE..

 

I really am lost as to why you are arguing every point even when its been printed BY DARREN...

 

It just comes across as being the last person posting syndrome you see in some forums..

 

Look, I am out of here, reasonable arguments I can deal with but stuff that's dropped to "I'm right" even if evidence shows otherwise are just daft..

 

Follow me JoSch and make better use of your time eh...

I don't want to be right. I want to you to stop thrashing the project.

Edited May 28, 2019 by JoSch

[Mclaneinc]

I don't want to be right. I want to you to stop thrashing the project.

 

It seems you have those two twisted up.....I'm NOT thrashing the project, I'm giving a POV based on fact, if that is too hard to handle then you are wasting both of our times..

 

You clearly ARE arguing for the sake of it.....If facts are not good enough then something seems wrong...

 

You keep arguing with people, I have better stuff to do....

Edited May 28, 2019 by Mclaneinc

[jaybird3rd]

Brenski, your whole argument about raising concerns is moot, because all of you dont want to buy the book any way in the first place.

I think that's an unwarranted assumption. Do you really want to claim that everyone who raised concerns or offered constructive criticisms was someone who had no intention of buying the book in the first place? How could you possibly know that?

 

For whatever it's worth, I was initially a backer of this book, but I decided to withdraw my pledge after these concerns started to be raised, because I found the explanations to be unsatisfactory. The concerns that changed my view of the project had nothing to do with naysayers in the peanut gallery "trashing the project" or nitpicking over trivia; they were the kind of basic quality control issues that any professional author has to contend with. These include: the overall quality of the writing and of the graphic design, whether all of the author's sources are properly credited, whether the rights to the material were properly secured or whether they would fall under fair use, etc. A careful look at the Kickstarter page by any objective reader would raise red flags in all of these areas. This might not be as big of a problem if the book was being given away for free, but this is a crowdfunded project which is asking for a substantial amount of money.

 

(To cite just one example: the use of "placeholder" text from Wikipedia in the sample pages shown on Kickstarter. The author claimed that "Wikipedia and interview material are placement during research purposes and have been completely rewritten"—a sentence that itself probably needs to be completely rewritten. As a published author myself, I can tell you that it is NEVER a good idea to do this. In a publication of this size, it is inevitable that, even with the best of intentions, at least some of this "placeholder" text will end up being left in the final copy, or "rewritten" in such a way that inappropriately paraphrases the original text. When that happens, it's plagiarism, whether it was intended or not. This is such an amateurish mistake that it raised serious questions in my mind about whether the author was doing his due diligence in other areas, most of which wouldn't be evident until after the book was published. The fact that this wasn't caught by anyone until after the Kickstarter went live suggests to me that the project was not ready to be crowdfunded, despite claims to the contrary on the Kickstarter page.)

 

So, what are we in the community supposed to do in this situation? Should we sweep these concerns under the rug and offer only uncritical praise in the name of "supporting the community" because this is ostensibly a "labor of love"? Or, should the community offer constructive criticisms aimed at making the product better (or, in the worst case, sending it back to the drawing board so it can be properly fixed), for the purpose of protecting others in the community from spending their money on a (potentially) substandard product?

 

I can remember similar discussions years ago about homebrew games when they started to "go commercial," after a few mediocre games were offered at enormous profit as "limited collector's items":

 

I think that there needs to be open and honest feedback, offered through communities like this one. This can serve either to steer collectors away from the bad games, or even to kill the bad games before they're finished. This may sound harsh, but not every novice programmer who's just learned to cobble something together with Batari BASIC deserves to have their creations put on a professionally-produced cartridge and sold for $40 a pop. If they want only to enjoy the games for themselves, that's all well and good, but there should be strict standards of quality for games that are offered as commercial products. To unequivocally encourage everyone and praise everything in the name of "supporting the community" only does a disservice to the community.

 

I maintain that the same principle applies to crowdfunded projects such as books. Once you decide to offer something as a commercial product, even to your fellow hobbyists, it completely changes the relationship between you and them. They are now your customers—or, in the case of a crowdfunded project, investors—and they have a right to ask tough questions and to expect to get their money's worth. This doesn't mean that they don't appreciate the attempt, and it doesn't mean that they don't want the project to succeed; in fact, it means just the opposite. Those who do not understand this may feel stung by the kind of input being offered here, but so be it; that's preferable to knowingly allowing a (potentially) substandard product to slip through without saying anything, out of fear of hurting the creator's feelings. Far from "supporting the community," this can only harm the community—especially other creators, who will then have to fight harder for their own projects to overcome doubts among those who have been burned in the past.

[Guest]

Man: Is this the right room for an argument?

Other Man: I've told you once.

Man: No you haven't!

Other Man:: Yes I have.

Man: When?

Other Man: Just now.

Man: No you didn't!

Other Man: Yes I did!

Man: You didn't!

Other Man: I did!

Man: You didn't!

Other Man: I'm telling you, I did!

Man: You did not!

Other Man: Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

Edited May 28, 2019 by Guest

[Fred_M]

Well said @jaybird3rd! As English is not my native language, I was not able to write a similar post. You are exactly describing how I feel about this project

[Mclaneinc]

Only chiming in to THANK Jaybird...

[JoSch]

I think that's an unwarranted assumption. Do you really want to claim that everyone who raised concerns or offered constructive criticisms was someone who had no intention of buying the book in the first place? How could you possibly know that?

You won. You were all completely right to thrash the project, Darren, me, whoever, just because I pointedly chose to use "all" instead of "most".

Silly me.

How could I know? Because of most of them very pointedly and repeatedly said so in this thread.

Edited May 28, 2019 by JoSch

[ultrasteve]

...The target amount set for the project was to cover the costs of the book production shipping and taxes....

 

...as the book is completed and its simply needs the funding to go straight to the printing and shipping process...

 

Darren said that on the 21st April, a day after the Kickstarter was launched. During the course of the Kickstarter itself, on the pages of it – as we have seen – he said the same thing.

 

The bottom line is that despite what anyone wants to level at those of us raising concerns, Darren said that, not us – you're shooting the messengers. Darren blatantly copied artwork, not us. Look at the myriad other errors, lifted content, and indecipherable, unintelligible rhetoric. They are the facts laid bare. I would have backed the project were it not for all of those things, and I and many others have only ever been warning against the risks they exposed.

 

Frankly, he is lucky that this discussion has been contained to this Atari Age thread, and not taken place within the comments section of the Kickstarter campaign.

[FifthPlayer]

 

And, I repeat that, the cover is fair use in my opinion. Is this an actionable violation https://jamesostafford.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/rocka-rolla-original.jpg?AFAIK, they were never sued. If the Judas Priest cover is fair use, why isn't Darren's cover?

 

First, Greyfox has already acknowledged that he has inappropriately copied the cover earlier in this thread.

 

Second, there is a difference between the Judas Priest cover art you posted and Greyfox's cover. The Judas Priest cover is fair use because the borrowed content is obvious to the vast majority of people who see it. The artwork in Greyfox's cover is taken from a relatively obscure work, which is not well known even to most Atari fans. So the appropriation is not recognizable to the audience nor acknowledged by the author. That's the difference between an "homage" (fair use) and "plaigiarism" (theft).

Edited May 28, 2019 by FifthPlayer

[JoSch]

 

First, Greyfox has already acknowledged that he has inappropriately copied the cover earlier in this thread.

 

Second, there is a difference between the Judas Priest cover art you posted and Greyfox's cover. The Judas Priest cover is fair use because the borrowed content is obvious to the vast majority of people who see it. The artwork in Greyfox's cover is taken from a relatively obscure work, which is not well known even to most Atari fans. So the appropriation is not recognizable to the audience nor acknowledged by the author. That's the difference between an "homage" (fair use) and "plaigiarism" (theft).

First, I read his comment not like this:

He wrote "With wanting to make this the best possible presentation for Atari fans, If people are uncomfortable with the front book cover of the book, I am open to suggestions in this regard." and then "I have already begun preparing something of a new cover that removes all traces of the previous design with it being 90% changed and no Plagiarism to be seen,...".

Doesn't sound like an admission of guilt.

 

Second, I always thought a copyright violation is always a copyright violation, even when the reader doesn't know it. Can you give a source for your sentiment?

Also, the Wikipedia article on Fair Use states that "A key consideration in recent fair use cases is the extent to which the use is transformative."

That is clearly the case in this cover, because it is not the same cover. That was always my argument: It is a transformation, so it can classify as fair use.

[flashjazzcat]

First, I read his comment not like this:

He wrote "With wanting to make this the best possible presentation for Atari fans, If people are uncomfortable with the front book cover of the book, I am open to suggestions in this regard." and then "I have already begun preparing something of a new cover that removes all traces of the previous design with it being 90% changed and no Plagiarism to be seen,...".

Doesn't sound like an admission of guilt.

Sure it does. He says he's replacing the existing design with one which has "no plagiarism to be seen". Why would anyone who considered the existing design to show no signs of plagiarism write such a thing?

 

"Take this food away and bring me something without beans!"

"But sir... there are no beans on the dish."

"Did I say there were?"

 

Of course many of these utterances are so peculiarly worded that I guess the intended sentiment is open to interpretation. He may not have intended to imply an acknowledgement of plagiarism, but managed to do so anyway. However, if one wants to really pull the semantics of the sentence apart, you could read that the revised design will still be plagiarised, but will be so heavily altered (ninety per cent changed, no less) that the plagiarism will be harder to detect.

 

Second, I always thought a copyright violation is always a copyright violation, even when the reader doesn't know it. Can you give a source for your sentiment?

Also, the Wikipedia article on Fair Use states that "A key consideration in recent fair use cases is the extent to which the use is transformative."

That is clearly the case in this cover, because it is not the same cover. That was always my argument: It is a transformation, so it can classify as fair use.

I think the problem people have is that the fact it is a derivative work - transformative or not - was obfuscated by the relative obscurity of the source material. Were the cover - as I wrote several pages ago - based on the cover of 'Mapping the Atari', no obfuscation would be possible, since almost everyone would immediately recognise that the cover was derived from 'Mapping the Atari', regardless of whether the author clearly stated this were the case.

[FifthPlayer]

From Greyfox, article #84 in this thread (emphasis mine):

 

This was a great spot, I did indeed copy that cover and used elements from it and have no problems admitting this as I really liked the design of it and felt it fitted the concept for what was intended with the visual History book

 

From Greyfox again, article #157 in this thread:

 

So I think the main reasoning for this post is to discuss the Book cover firstly, I wish to say it was unprofessional of me to utilise and copy a cover design of a publication that was plagiaristic and unfair, but I repeat, I did attempt to contact the author in relation to doing this type of design about 6 months as I wished to seek their permission to use this design style as a homage, not to steal or pass off as my own original work and felt it fitted the book brilliantly, but was inappropriate to have it there and I hold my hands up this

 

 

Article #84 is an explicit admission that he copied the design. Article #157 is explicit admission that the appropriation was plaigiarism.

[JoSch]

The silent majority has nothing to say. I'm fighting alone against a overwhelming group. My will is drained.

I concede. You were totally right, I was totally wrong.

[6BQ5]

566 backers with 27 hours to go! The project needs to sell about 6 - 7 books per hour till the end in order to be successfully funded.

 

Then? Well, we’ll see.

[pajero_pn]

584 backers with 21 hours to go, need $4,5K

[Guest]

584 backers with 21 hours to go, need $4,5K

 

15% in final day?

 

these things aren't like ebay and don't tend to get the last minute rush.

[Almerian]

 

I maintain that the same principle applies to crowdfunded projects such as books. Once you decide to offer something as a commercial product, even to your fellow hobbyists, it completely changes the relationship between you and them. They are now your customers—or, in the case of a crowdfunded project, investors—and they have a right to ask tough questions and to expect to get their money's worth. This doesn't mean that they don't appreciate the attempt, and it doesn't mean that they don't want the project to succeed; in fact, it means just the opposite. Those who do not understand this may feel stung by the kind of input being offered here, but so be it; that's preferable to knowingly allowing a (potentially) substandard product to slip through without saying anything, out of fear of hurting the creator's feelings. Far from "supporting the community," this can only harm the community—especially other creators, who will then have to fight harder for their own projects to overcome doubts among those who have been burned in the past.

 

I agree with the sentiment of this post. However, it is always a possible substandard product before it is released.

 

On the subject of the book, valid concerns have been raised about the book and I'm interested in how and if the project continues.

 

Also, to me, somehow, instead of only straight criticism of the book, this topic at times almost feels like a bunch of schoolboys ganging up on a bloke in a corner of the schoolyard.

[Mclaneinc]

this topic at times almost feels like a bunch of schoolboys ganging up on a bloke in a corner of the schoolyard.

 

Whilst it may have seemed to have got to that at times its also previously been insinuated that its happening which also fuels the thread badly as well. Simply its a set of people taking a chance to explain what is wrong here, those that spoke up knew there would be an un-needed back lash on them but getting the facts out was more important than that. And lets not forget that Darren isn't just anyone, hes a publisher of magazines etc already so you kind of hoped that it would have been a better display than was given considering that.

Edited May 29, 2019 by Mclaneinc