2/1/1982 A Kick When You're DownWhile your magazine is a greatly needed interface between consumer and industry, it is interesting to note that the consumer still seems to get short-circuited. I read in a recent issue of your magazine that Broderbund Software was offering an upgraded joy-stick version of Snoggle for those who had purchased the keyboard version. I anxiously attempted to take advantage of this offer. However, upon contacting Broderbund, I was informed that I was a couple of days late; they had sold all Snoggle material to Atari and cannot deal with this product. They suggested that I contact "my" Atari dealer and continue to "enjoy" the version that I have. I'm certain "my" Atari dealer will love to take care of me and my Apple. Maybe he will offer me an upgraded version if I agree to take receipt of an Atari 800. Sounds like a deal to me. As most probably know, it is not all fun and games the way it is written in your magazine. I just wish to make you and perhaps some readers aware of this type of unfortunate "big business" dealing that will sour the appletite of many personal computerlsts.
If things like this continue, it will be easy justification for anyone to bootleg, rob, or steal such software. "Aye—Mate, pirate or perish" might be the only answer. Jerry Roberts, Melbourne, FL - V2N5 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The letter you received from Broderbund stated, ". . . as of October 21, all Snoggle material became the property of Atari. . . ." You have jumped to the conclusion that Broderbund sold Snoggle to Atari. They did not. Threatened lawsuits from Atari and injunctions from that company and its parent, Warner Communications, based on the similarity of Snoggle to the arcade game, Pac-Man, were more than a small, family-owned company such as Broderbund could fight. Therefore, Atari took Snoggle. The apology in your letterfrom Broderbund is sincere. The question is, indeed, one of piracy, or, at least, of copyright violation. Programmers such as Jun Wada did not see the translation of a program from one medium—the arcade—to another—the Apple home computer—to be a violation. Neither, at first, did the arcade gamemakers. Recently, the worm has turned, and Atari has been demanding royalties on and/or removal from the market of any products that resemble their own. In many cases, their objection is open to question, but most software companies don't have the resources to stand up to the multimegabusinesses behind Atari. Ken Williams of On-Line Systems, with slightly more resources than others and even a great deal of courage, is doing so. Softalk will keep you informed of the results. (See Tradetalk, page 44.) The controversy will be covered in depth in the January issue of Softline, Softalk's sister publication. Even if Broderbund's actions had been everything you interpreted them as, it would not constitute the least excuse for you to engage in piracy. Boycott—doing without a program—is an appropriate response to business practices you don't like; theft is not. Softalk Respone to Jerry Roberts - V2N5 Comments are closed.
|