41 Module Library: Last chance for common sense

[Ángel Martin]

(07-12-2016 03:24 PM)HP-Collection Wrote:  I *really* would like to make steps towards you as I'm shure you, the community and me would get benefits on future software from your hands, but I do not see a approach on your side. What is YOUR offer?

There's a misunderstanding on your part: I'm not negotiating or bargaining for a deal, only pointing out (as this thread's title makes obvious) that there's a better way than each one of us playing for keeps.

I have shared all ROM images of the modules I have purchased, plus all that I have produced myself (many of them co-authored with other people, who also shared their work, time and knowledge). Yes it's a personal choice, and yes I think it's the better way for uncountable reasons but that in summary reads: everybody wins and we all have more enjoyment out of it.

\nuff said.

[HP-Collection]

Guys: You all know about the value of software:
Adobes Photoshop costs more than $1000 even the hardware (paperbox and CD) is worth a bug! --> The real value is the software, not the hardware.
If I would get all unknown modules for free I would be happy to share the content of them with you for free too.
I'm happy to share items, but I would also like to *get* items for that. As you said, Dave, sharing is a bidirectional thing. So my offer is clear. I share items:

a) if I get a partitional refund for my investment as I had to pay more than it is worth because of outbidding.
b) if I get missing hardware module (even the images are already free on the web!). In that case I can give you a piece of sugar for free: For each missing hardware module, I share two images, selected by the donator.

Sorry guys, swiss cows might give expensive milk, but the milk is fairtrade!

[Gene]

Each person can choose as they wish. I have seen no evidence that the availability of rom images has lowered the value of original items on TAS, so I suspect you can easily sell these odd modules for near what you paid if you wish. Your choice obviously.

Angel, thank you for not charging me for your wonderful rom images. I'm well aware how much time that has taken. Muchas gracias and muito obrigado.

[Ángel Martin]

(07-13-2016 11:20 AM)Gene Wrote:  Angel, thank you for not charging me for your wonderful rom images. I'm well aware how much time that has taken. Muchas gracias and muito obrigado.

My pleasure Gene, and thanks to you for your neat ideas on how to improve them and interesting projects to chew on.

Now we're all showing our true colors, and *that's* fair trade.
To each one its own - friends of the greed-free world, unite!

[Gene]

As to new projects :-) I would still like to see a couple of things:

1) Please find a fairly required .rom (such as the PowerCL, OSX3, etc.) to add INC and DEC as standard operating system functions. It is so nice not to have to do ISG X and add a NOP afterward. Is there any room anywhere in a rom most of us will always have plugged in to add these two short functions? :-)

and

2) I would still love to see the .raw files for the HP 67 games that have already been converted into HP 41 equivalents that are free for the downloading here on MoHPC put into a .rom with the card reader 7XXX functions. These are games that have no equivalent in the 41CL at present. I'm not talking about yet another blackjack :-) but games with no HP 41 option today.

Food for thought and a wink. ;-)

[HP-Collection]

In that case, I regret that we probably will not find a satisfactory solution for all parties. With a clear conscience I can say that I have brought proposals to solve - but these were only rejected and no further constructive proposals were introduced.
I always thought that one should go on each other in negotiations, rather than insisting on his own opinion.
Nevertheless, I thank everyone involved for clarifying its opinion.

[Dave Frederickson]

(07-13-2016 01:37 PM)HP-Collection Wrote:  In that case, I regret that we probably will not find a satisfactory solution for all parties. With a clear conscience I can say that I have brought proposals to solve - but these were only rejected and no further constructive proposals were introduced.
I always thought that one should go on each other in negotiations, rather than insisting on his own opinion.
Nevertheless, I thank everyone involved for clarifying its opinion.

Hi Matthias,

So back to my question, how much for a copy of the 71B 0AAAA ROM?

Sylvain has been asking for a copy of this ROM for quite a while in order to complete the O/S section of the 71B Compendium.

Dave

[emece67]

Perhaps I'm missing the point here. Suppose I pay money to a person owning a "difficult" module for its ROM image. What stops me for redistributing such image freely?

And more, are there any legal issues in selling ROM images of a software (inside a hardware you own) that, perhaps, is copyrighted/patented/protected in some way?

Regards.

[Sylvain Cote]

A little late, but here is my view on the subject ...

For the collector part of me, collecting is a reflection of my appreciation of the object that I acquire.
For the user part of me, I do not really care if the object is an original or a cloned as long as it does what I need it to do.

Worth ...

The collection value mean little for me, in a sense that at some point in time it may worth a lot and in another point in time it may worth nothing.
So, I assume that my collection worth nothing, even though I paid quite a lot of money for it. It's worth will be determined when it's time to sell or donating it.

Sharing ...

Because I appreciate the objects that I collect, I also like to exchange informations, views, etc., with other peoples interested in the same subject.
In order to so with the largest group of peoples, I choose to share the pieces that can be shared (documents and softwares).

Final thought ...

I do not think that sharing diminishes the values of my items, because for collectors, an original item is everything, copies are interesting only.
Also, a normal user will generally never pay what a collector is ready to pay for a original item.

Best regards,

Sylvain

PS: This is my view and I respect every one who has different view than me on the suject.

PPS: Dave, I may have invested a lot in the 71 Compendium but a lot of peoples have also contribute their time, documents & softwares for it.
So the thanks should go to everyone involved (you included). Thank You All!

[Howard Owen]

(07-13-2016 08:32 AM)HP-Collection Wrote:  Guys: You all know about the value of software: Adobes Photoshop costs more than $1000 even the hardware (paperbox and CD) is worth a bug! --> The real value is the software, not the hardware.

We are dealing with rare bit patterns imbedded in rare hardware. The bits can be copied arbitrarily but the hardware is unique or nearly so. Which of these have value to a collector?

Although I personally feel that the hardware modules are what is worth collecting, and although I've benefitted enormously from the culture of sharing, and would gladly give back for the days upon days of pleasure I've derived from it, I recognize that Matthias has a right to value his possessions as he sees fit. Matthias is attempting to exploit scarcity. The bit patterns he controls are rare. He feels he can extract value from those patterns. Most of us, with backgrounds in user groups and/or open source software, tend to feel offended by what we see as avarice. But that's the way a lot of the world works.

What is interesting about this is that we are talking about software. Once made available, those bits may be copied an arbitrary number of times with zero marginal cost. Their rarity would vanish if they were freed from their hardware prison. Their economic value would drop to zero.

Matthias seems to be offering to sell those bits to the community. I’m guessing that he feels that the community ought to be able to pool resources to purchase the bits from him. He also offers to cap his selling price to some percentage of the price he paid for the modules. As a commercial proposition, this strikes me as reasonable. But it offends the sensibilities of many in this community.

I’m an enthusiast. I get pleasure from playing with old bits. I’m not wealthy, but I might be willing to participate in a consortium to free some of those bits, provided the price was reasonable and with the understanding that they would be free to roam the world after the purchase. My participation would also depend on a robust response from others in this community. What “robust” means is TBD.

Perhaps Matthias can start a new thread in the For Sale forum to gauge interest in this idea?

[HP-Collection]

@wltec

Thanks for your kind words As you put me on your ignore list the only way to thank you is in the threat.

[Dave Frederickson]

Well, Sylvain, I tried to buy a copy of the 71B 0AAAA ROM, but as I've asked three times and received no response, I conclude that it's not for sale.

Dave

[Ángel Martin]

(07-13-2016 05:47 PM)hbo Wrote:  " ...is attempting to exploit scarcity. The bit patterns he controls are rare. He feels he can extract value from those patterns. Most of us, with backgrounds in user groups and/or open source software, tend to feel offended by what we see as avarice. But that's the way a lot of the world works."

Howard, good recap and objective list of facts. But as already mentioned before, if that so called "initiative" progresses (and for the record, do *not* include me), and those rare bit patterns are to be re-purchased by some members of the community to sponsor a private collector's investment (that, if I may say, was made willingly and happily if we're to judge by all evidences) - then are those members under a contractual obligation NOT to share them either, also to protect their incursion into the world of "it's all for trade and I need to protect my investment"... propagating the pattern that has taken us thus far to here (i.e. nowhere). Nahh, I'd say one must draw the line somewhere and in my mind it's been long overdue.

And then there's the question of who benefits from a static distribution of coveted items that are just put in a drawer and lustfully dusted every three to four weeks? In case someone wonders, an active usage of the information is what happens when people share ideas and learns from methods and approaches from other OPEN sources. Or would you think that I invented all by myself the nice tricks included in my modules? Nope, one way or another you can trace them in previous knowledge, as it's usually the case with everything in life where progress is achieved by adding further value to already existing valuables.

What a bummer, and why is this being discussed in a user's forum that prides itself in the free exchange of information? - on items obsolete for more than 20 years already in average!!

Someone is missing the point entirely, gee it may even be me.

[Accutron]

(07-14-2016 05:11 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:  why is this being discussed in a user's forum that prides itself in the free exchange of information?

Does it? This community has a well-established culture of claiming copyrights on scans of official HP documents and shielding them behind a pay wall, and everybody is complicit. When a new person comes on here and asks, "Does anybody have a copy of X manual?", the universal response is "Buy the DVD." For the record, this is an unenforceable copyright, based on a position known as "sweat-of-the-brow", and it has been consistently shot down in multiple legal precedents.

Flatly refusing to duplicate the ROMs in question is pointlessly selfish for such obsolete material, but it's not unethical. Offering to provide images in exchange for money or physical ROMs is deeply unethical, and is no different than pirating movies and selling the duplicates. As the ROMs in question have no commercial value, selling their image is perhaps a victimless crime, but it's still unethical, no matter how you cut it.

[rprosperi]

(07-14-2016 01:50 PM)Accutron Wrote:  Does it? This community has a well-established culture of claiming copyrights on scans of official HP documents and shielding them behind a pay wall, and everybody is complicit. When a new person comes on here and asks, "Does anybody have a copy of X manual?", the universal response is "Buy the DVD." For the record, this is an unenforceable copyright, based on a position known as "sweat-of-the-brow", and it has been consistently shot down in multiple legal precedents.

Flatly refusing to duplicate the ROMs in question is pointlessly selfish for such obsolete material, but it's not unethical. Offering to provide images in exchange for money or physical ROMs is deeply unethical, and is no different than pirating movies and selling the duplicates. As the ROMs in question have no commercial value, selling their image is perhaps a victimless crime, but it's still unethical, no matter how you cut it.

Though I generally agree with all Accutron's latter comments, I will share my view of why I reply with "get the DVD" to these kinds of requests.

1. Supporting purchases may help, in a small way, to offset the costs and time spent by Dave hosting this awesome forum for all of us to exchange info and comments. I would not be surprised if this actually lost money.

2. It cuts down on what would become many, many threads of do you have this or that, based on the whim of the day.

3. Most folks seeking such a document do now, or will, also be seeking others which are also in the same pkg.

I recommend getting the DVD probably as often as any other person, and no one has ever asked or told me to do so, it just seems the best response based on the above.

I've never seen anyone assert any copyright claim for the HP docs, have you? The price one pays is clearly not for any kind of copyright/royalty payment, nor is it described as such.

I've never seen a complaint when someone publishes a link to doc which is included on the DVD. Also, I've never heard anyone complain about someone sharing a file from the DVD, rather I believe folks encourage newcomers to get it in order to benefit from having all the other content.

[Dave Frederickson]

(07-14-2016 03:44 PM)rprosperi Wrote:  

(07-14-2016 01:50 PM)Accutron Wrote:  Does it? This community has a well-established culture of claiming copyrights on scans of official HP documents and shielding them behind a pay wall, and everybody is complicit. When a new person comes on here and asks, "Does anybody have a copy of X manual?", the universal response is "Buy the DVD." For the record, this is an unenforceable copyright, based on a position known as "sweat-of-the-brow", and it has been consistently shot down in multiple legal precedents.

Flatly refusing to duplicate the ROMs in question is pointlessly selfish for such obsolete material, but it's not unethical. Offering to provide images in exchange for money or physical ROMs is deeply unethical, and is no different than pirating movies and selling the duplicates. As the ROMs in question have no commercial value, selling their image is perhaps a victimless crime, but it's still unethical, no matter how you cut it.

Though I generally agree with all Accutron's latter comments, I will share my view of why I reply with "get the DVD" to these kinds of requests.

1. Supporting purchases may help, in a small way, to offset the costs and time spent by Dave hosting this awesome forum for all of us to exchange info and comments. I would not be surprised if this actually lost money.

2. It cuts down on what would become many, many threads of do you have this or that, based on the whim of the day.

3. Most folks seeking such a document do now, or will, also be seeking others which are also in the same pkg.

I recommend getting the DVD probably as often as any other person, and no one has ever asked or told me to do so, it just seems the best response based on the above.

I've never seen anyone assert any copyright claim for the HP docs, have you? The price one pays is clearly not for any kind of copyright/royalty payment, nor is it described as such.

I've never seen a complaint when someone publishes a link to doc which is included on the DVD. Also, I've never heard anyone complain about someone sharing a file from the DVD, rather I believe folks encourage newcomers to get it in order to benefit from having all the other content.

I, too, recommend getting the MoHPC DVD/Flash drive as I feel the cost is well worth the convenience. However, compare this to TOS who recently made the contents of their archive available as a free download or the HP Computer Museum, whose archive is online.

Dave

[Ángel Martin]

(07-14-2016 01:50 PM)Accutron Wrote:  Flatly refusing to duplicate the ROMs in question is pointlessly selfish for such obsolete material, but it's not unethical. Offering to provide images in exchange for money or physical ROMs is deeply unethical, and is no different than pirating movies and selling the duplicates. As the ROMs in question have no commercial value, selling their image is perhaps a victimless crime, but it's still unethical, no matter how you cut it.

100% agreement with that.

[Accutron]

(07-14-2016 03:44 PM)rprosperi Wrote:  I've never seen anyone assert any copyright claim for the HP docs, have you? The price one pays is clearly not for any kind of copyright/royalty payment, nor is it described as such.

I've never seen a complaint when someone publishes a link to doc which is included on the DVD. Also, I've never heard anyone complain about someone sharing a file from the DVD, rather I believe folks encourage newcomers to get it in order to benefit from having all the other content.

Places like MoHPC, Artek etc., all claim a copyright on the 'scan', i.e. the work required to convert the document to a digital format, which is the justification for charging money. MoHPC charges a rather modest sum and turns the profits inward to maintaining a non-commercial website, which is definitely the more noble approach (albeit not as noble as simply hosting them for free or uploading them to archive.org.) Artek is far worse, demanding vast profit for individual documents and basing their entire business model around it.

From the last page of every document on the MoHPC DVD:

"Scan Copyright ©
The Museum of HP Calculators
http://www.hpmuseum.org
Original content used with permission.
Thank you for supporting the Museum of HP
Calculators by purchasing this Scan!
Please to not make copies of this scan or
make it available on file sharing services."

The copyright claim itself and the request to not freely redistribute the files are assertions of presumed rights.

[Howard Owen]

(07-14-2016 05:11 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:  ...then are those members under a contractual obligation NOT to share them either... also to

I wouldn't participate in such an effort either. I clearly stated that I would expect those bit patterns to be considered free to copy (absent any other copyright claim) and I wouldn't go along with a deal that didn't explicitly include a provision stating that.

(07-14-2016 05:11 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:  In case someone wonders, an active usage of the information is what happens when people share ideas and learns from methods and approaches from other OPEN sources.

That's a moral point that I agree with. But I'm focussed on the goal of liberating the information. Do you know the moral history of every module in your collection? Did a serial rapist contribute code? Did a murderer help publish it? (I'm not by any stretch accusing Matthias of any of those things. Just making a point.) Are the ideas that would be freed by paying a greedy toll collector any less free? Would you refuse to be enlightened by bits that were obtained that way? On that basis you'd best stay away from most of the world's history and literature.

That's hyperbole, but I truly believe that the minor evil (and expense) of the means is far outweighed by the ends in this case.

[Ángel Martin]

(07-14-2016 07:55 PM)hbo Wrote:  

(07-14-2016 05:11 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:  ...then are those members under a contractual obligation NOT to share them either... also to

I wouldn't participate in such an effort either. I clearly stated that I would expect those bit patterns to be considered free to copy (absent any other copyright claim) and I wouldn't go along with a deal that didn't explicitly include a provision stating that.

Yes you did, sorry that my response didn't make that part clear - I was talking in general.

(07-14-2016 07:55 PM)hbo Wrote:  

(07-14-2016 05:11 AM)Ángel Martin Wrote:  In case someone wonders, an active usage of the information is what happens when people share ideas and learns from methods and approaches from other OPEN sources.

That's a moral point that I agree with. But I'm focussed on the goal of liberating the information. Do you know the moral history of every module in your collection? Did a serial rapist contribute code? Did a murderer help publish it? (I'm not by any stretch accusing Matthias of any of those things. Just making a point.) Are the ideas that would be freed by paying a greedy toll collector any less free? Would you refuse to be enlightened by bits that were obtained that way? On that basis you'd best stay away from most of the world's history and literature.

That's hyperbole, but I truly believe that the minor evil (and expense) of the means is far outweighed by the ends in this case.

Well, sure enough those scenarios are unnerving but usually they're never taking into consideration to that level of ramification. Decisions and choices are tough enough already!

Cheers,
'AM