INFO-ATARI16 Digest Fri, 22 Dec 89 Volume 89 : Issue 848 Today's Topics: Absoft Fortran Version Copyrights and Commercial Networks and Usenet Improving this newsgroup Merry Christmas, Planet Earth... Res Changing (really terminate handler) Unexpandable megas ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 89 09:16+0100 From: Ritzert%DMZRZU71.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU Subject: Absoft Fortran Version Message-ID: <891222081630.079255@DMZRZU71-UNI-MAINZ--GERMANY> > I hear there is revision 2.3 available ? Where did you get it ? In Germany, You get it from Weide in Hilden. V.2.3 does not seem to differ much from 2.2. In fact, it comes with the docs for 2.2. The version is nearly 2 years old. I don't think it is worthwile to upgrade from 2.2. In February, the Absoft people wrote me they were working on an extended version of the complier including NAMELIST. Has anyone heared if this version has been released? BTW: does anyone have informations on the state of Fortran 8x? Has it been released finally or will be x.ge.10 ? Michael mjr@dmzrzu71.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: 22 Dec 89 10:55:29 GMT From: tramp!walkerb@boulder.colorado.edu (Brian Walker) Subject: Copyrights and Commercial Networks and Usenet Message-ID: <15151@boulder.Colorado.EDU> In article <957@crash.cts.com> canada@crash.cts.com (Diane Barlow Close) writes: ] In article <1989Dec21.041439.24056@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gl8f@bessel.acc.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes: ] ] >One thing I did ask Dave Small to clarify, though, was GEnie's ] >compilation copyright. Obviously they cannot claim a compilation ] >copyright on the compilation of comp.sys.atari.st articles, so they ] >will be unable to stop GEnie subscribers from downloading all the ] >c.s.a.st articles and putting them up on BBSes and whatnot. ] ] This is the part that concerns me the most. According to an author who ] specializes in books on copyrights: ] ] ``The matter of Dave violating or not violating the law is totally ] up to USENET, not the attorney general. You see, these laws are ] not enforced unless someone cries "fowl". I assume USENET does ] not mind if their messages are reproduced and put on another ] system. ] ] If USENET doesn't mind, then there is no violation, because they ] have essentially licensed the use of their messages for other ] systems. Technically, all BBS' messages are protected under law ] from reproduction, IF the system states that access to the system ] is conditional (ie: use of passwords). Remember, an authored work ] is protected under copyright. Each message is the property of the ] owner of the BBS. It doesn't matter if the BBS contains ] programs, messages, or "books", they are protected under copyright ] unless the author/owner claims they are public domain. Who is the owner? Consider this question. ] Sure, it's wierd, but it's the LETTER of the law. However, you ] know as well as I do, it would be stupid to enforce for just ] messages. ] ] I'm not saying Dave is a crook. I happen to like his products ] and his magazine articles. I'm just saying USENET could get him. ] I'm saying this to perhaps inform him, not to threaten him. Note: USEnet would probably not do much besides complain. ] -- Richard Kelsch [Author's plug deleted] ] It certainly does seem unethical for a network such as GEnie to upload, ] basically, public domain messages and then place an anthology copyright ] on them. In fact, maybe the restrictions will become even greater when ] one considers the overall effect of GEnie's legal system. What about ] non-profit BBS's which have read-only nodes established with Usenet? ] They may become liable to *GEnie* who owns the copyright ...I am not ] saying that is the way it is, but that is the way it may become. This, I believe, is where we diverge from the realm of philosophical discussion and enter the far reaches of fantasy. Whose fantasy? GEnie's, for one, if they ever tried to claim ownership of USEnet news articles. Legally, there is no way GEnie could own the copyright to USEnet messages. That would be like claiming a copyright on public domain software or claiming a copyright on something that is already copyrigted. GEnie can only claim a compilation copyright, nothing more. The publisher of an anthology gothic horror stories cannot possibly claim ownership of the works of Edgar Allen Poe. If somebody else published the same stories, the publisher would be powerless to stop them unless he owned the copyrights on stories by Edgar Allen Poe. Likewise, the publisher could not prevent another from publishing a set of stories which have been placed in the public domain because the public owns those stories and it would not be legal for the publisher to take ownership from the public. This would be theft. Basically, what you propose is ridiculous. And even if GEnie were foolish enough to attempt such a thing, the USEnet community could simply pull the plug. You're grasping at straws here. Brian Walker, University of Colorado at Boulder walkerb@tramp.colorado.edu ...!?ncar,nbires?!boulder!tramp!walkerb A person who claims that absolute zero is impossible to obtain has not taken a quiz in thermo yet. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 21 Dec 89 23:38 EST From: JOHNBARNES@ENH.NIST.GOV Subject: Improving this newsgroup I accept Marcelino Bernardo's statement about the inadequacies of the glossy ST press when it comes to real technical information. My reference to a library included things like the Abacus and Sybex books as well as source codes to true public domain programs. Many of the questions asked here, however, do not fall into the category of technical information. A number of them are from beginners who might do well to read Ralph Turner's Help Key column in ST Informer or his "Atari ST Book". Those questions that are of technical nature, such as the one about ringing the bell from GEM, oftewn receive rather terse answers that take a lot of work to implement. It would be nice to see these as more extended articles and to have these archived somewhere. The Atari community being what it is, we also see a number of cries for help coming out of utter darkness. The newsgroup serves a valuable function in giving these people a community that they can belong to. One difference between the 8-bit days and modern (ST) times seems to be that programming has become more complicated and people are less willing to share their knowledge openly. Of course in those days we really didn't have "developers" because Atari was just a game machine. Nowadays we see oodles of "public domain" software but very little source code. Ken Badertscher sometimes seems to feel that the only programmers worth talking to are the ones who are initiated into the Masonic Lodge by paying the fees and learning the secret handshakes. Atari needs every bit of help it can get. Every program that actually gets written and that does what it is supposed to do is one more reason to buy Atari. Information that will help accomplish this should be disseminated as widely as possible. This newsgroup is one way of doing that and it could become a truly valuable resource if we could put some more punch into the discourse. ------------------------------ Date: 22 DEC 89 00:23:34 CST From: Z4648252 Subject: Merry Christmas, Planet Earth... Message-ID: <891222.00220189.036999@SFA.CP6> I am constantly amazed how these nets reach the entire planet, so, with that in mind....to all STers inhabiting this planet of ours, Merry Christmas and God bless everyone. Our link will probably be down until the 27th, so I want to take the opportunity now to extend the greetings. This is my first year on BitNet and I appreciate all the friends that I've met here, the information that constantly keeps arriving regarding the latest news and rumors about the ST. To me, living in a very lonely ST world in my area, these facts are like perpetual gifts. Thanks again, holiday greetings to all....... Larry Rymal: |East Texas Atari 68NNNers| ------------------------------ Date: 22 Dec 89 01:18:20 GMT From: imagen!atari!apratt@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Allan Pratt) Subject: Res Changing (really terminate handler) Message-ID: <1912@atari.UUCP> neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) writes: > [Bulk of question deleted.] >So we put in a terminate handler at vector 0x102 [...] >Can we call the XBIOS safely from here? Yes. I wrote an off-the-cuff article "all about terminate handlers" on GEnie, then asked John Townsend to post it here. I don't know if he has, but among other things, it says you can make BIOS and XBIOS calls but not GEMDOS calls. ============================================ Opinions expressed above do not necessarily -- Allan Pratt, Atari Corp. reflect those of Atari Corp. or anyone else. ...ames!atari!apratt ------------------------------ Date: 22 Dec 89 03:32:00 GMT From: acf5!mitsolid@nyu.edu (Thanasis Mitsolides) Subject: Unexpandable megas Message-ID: <370009@acf5.NYU.EDU> >/* acf5:comp.sys.atari.st / gl8f@bessel.acc.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) / 4:59 pm Dec 20, 1989 */ >You are obviously wrong on 2 counts: Ts ts... Let us not get emotional, shall we? >1) Then Atari would have not put SIMMs onto the STE There is such a think like "trying another method when the first one fails" >Leave your silly conspiracy theories at home. I believe that ATARI is out there to make money. That, I think, is called bussiness. Do you call it a conspiracy?! Thanasis ------------------------------ End of INFO-ATARI16 Digest V89 Issue #848 *****************************************