[Coco] VCC Status …

Sat Jul 18 01:21:27 EDT 2015

The issue is more one of whether the person who intended to make it open
source was legally entitled to do so.  If the rights had been sold or
otherwise transferred to someone else that may not be the case.  I believe
this is what Steven was referring to.

I would suggest posting very publicly an intention to release the code
according to the authors wishes as we understand them, and waiting a
reasonable time for someone to protest.

On Jul 18, 2015 1:04 AM, "James Ross" <jrosslist at outlook.com> wrote:
>
> Dave and Bill –
>
> W/ both your posts we all have a clear picture of the status now! Thanks,
for the information!
>
> I can see both of your viewpoints – and I can sympathize w/ your
concerns. Yeah... I am not a lawyer either. However, I think it’s possible
to look at this from a different angle:
>
> If Joseph Forgione said this
>
> > now that I know somebody wants to take over on this I'll definatly make
it
> > open source
>
> AND he sent a copy of the source code around the same time, then IMO that
is an official “transaction” right there… he is in essence handing you
control of the software right there. He is making his intent known. And as
part of that intent he is also proclaiming it to be Open Source as well.
>
> The fact that he did not get around to doing the steps necessary himself
to make that happen does not matter. And since he has disappeared from the
scene, legally, I believe you would be totally in the clear to complete his
(last) wishes. I cannot see how that would not be the case.
>
> I wonder if a lawyer at OSI would take a look at this (pro bono, fat
chance?) and write up an official opinion on it?
>
> Well… No problems guys, I will drop it now.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 22:39:01 -0500
> > From: davidwladd at gmail.com
> > To: coco at maltedmedia.com
> > Subject: Re: [Coco] VCC Status …
> >
> > James,
> >
> > The information I last had from Joe was back in 2012 on June 20th. He
said
> > to me this:
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Joe <vcc6809 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes i think i do. Going to try to have it up on sourceforge this
weekend
> >>
> >
> > Previous reply was this:
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Joe <vcc6809 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> now that I know somebody wants to take over on this I'll definatly
make it
> >> open source. From reading the GNU website it seems I need to add
copyrights
> >> to all the source files, take out the copyrighted rom dumps and add
the GNU
> >> license file. not to hard but will take me a few hours this weekend.
> >>
> > Also I belive you are trying to build an RS-232 rompack plug-in. If you
> > like I can take a quick look at doing that. It was on my list anyway so
I
> > think I have a something started already. Again I need to loook for it.
:)
> >
> > Now I never had permission at any time to publish the source myself nor
> > would I even think of it cause someone somewhere has to have
control/rights
> > even if he did die.
> >
> >
> > Now what's funny is the email that I was chatting with him on does
have a
> > Google+ account connected to it now, but the name on the account does
not
> > match the name I would expect. The name shows on the Google+ is "Jack
> > Parsons"
> >
> > I myself am no lawyer and one reason I really didn't want to get into
the
> > mess of trying to push the code open source since he was going to do it
and
> > I was never given permission to do so.
> >
> > --
> > Coco mailing list
> > Coco at maltedmedia.com
> > https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>
>
> --
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco