Copyright strikes on Retro game Youtube vids - Paul Andrews?

[Lorfarius]

15 minutes ago, RetroLee said:

 

I've been following your comments

 

Before he does.. you are a single post member with a name referencing Lee Fogarty and WoS. Are you him? If so it'd be more appropriate for you to answer questions about your time with the Vega + first and the denials about the 14K salary you didn't get before you start questioning other long term members here out of the blue.

[RetroLee]

Sorry @Lorfarius, no, I'm not "that" Lee.  Probably a bad choice of avatar actually.  Just a fan of WoS.    I'm quite new to retro and just baffled to the past few weeks heat, just trying to understand why some people have grown so obsessive over this explosion and why some are still hanging on to threads like it was their life blood. 

 

Makes no difference to me, I'm just concerned that someone is obsessing.

[Bluejam]

On 27/10/2019 at 14:10, peteprodge said:

 

 

 

 

 

In case you missed it, earlier in this thread I revealed I also have autism. To have this 'you shouldn't have a go at autistic people' stance is a bit hypocritical, so are you going to stop whining at me?

 

And as for 'Autism sufferer', that's patronising and not exactly a reflection of it.

 

You might actually have had a point if I was attacking Kieran's autism. I'm not, and never have. I've pointed out he's a serial liar, he's selling a download of the Sinclair User magazine archive for personal profit (yeah, funny how Paul Andrews hasn't come down on this IP piracy from someone he pays to write books) and creates terrible retrogaming books/videos with glaring inaccuracies in them.

I don't see where his autism or my autism, comes into this. But hey, you keep bringing it up as if it's some kind of magical 'Here's Pete doing something really bad' angle that stands up to scrutiny.

 

 

 

 

As I said, I'm hardly a fan of Lee Fogarty, he has done some appalling things. Yet so have a few people who oppose him. I don't go in for this 'my enemy's enemy is my friend' nonsense, I just call out wrongdoing when I see it, I don't rigidly adhere to a 'side', that binary mentality doesn't work and it's childish.

 

 

 

I dunno pete, referring to someone who has autism as a fantasist and is obviously suffering mentally from all the bullying.... maybe not go there. You are obviously very anti bullying with your defending of Octavius and enjoying the lolz about Paul Andrews with ChinnyVision...

 

To be honest, you seem to attract drama all over social media. 

still kudos for having someone set up an account just to attack you!!!

 

@PeteProdgeSUCKS 

 

Not me by the way 

 

oh, these images are not related but just, you know, the DRAMA

 

 

[maryliddon]

2 hours ago, RetroLee said:

 

I've been following your comments with interest @maryliddon and several things concern me.   What is your unhealthy preoccupation with this gentleman and his IP?  Is there a reason you've become so emotional involved in this drama?  Everyone else has moved on from it, even the YouTuber (who is now seeing her Patreons start to leave).  Are you being paid to try and discredit this gentleman or do you have a personal axe to grind, or perhaps you're unhappy that you didn't purchase the Horace I.P first?  We'd love to know, your audience awaits!

 

Everyone needs a hobby.

 

Come on, you could probably ask that question without accusing me of being in the pocket of BIG RETRO or the bitter loser in a fight for some four decade old pixels.

 

FWIW I love the passion and enthusiasm of the retro community and hate seeing that pissed on by heavy handed assertion of commercial interests.

 

When it's done by the undisputed rights owner there's nothing much to do but grin and bear it.

 

I'm not sure that's the case here (though as I've said before it may well be) and I'd like to know.

 

If it's not it'd be good to do something about it and also have a clear enough understanding of the process of claiming retro gaming IP to prevent it happening again.

 

So it's about a general principle rather than Horace, Andrews UK or Octav1us in particular.

 

2 hours ago, RetroLee said:

Sorry @Lorfarius, no, I'm not "that" Lee.  Probably a bad choice of avatar actually.  Just a fan of WoS.    I'm quite new to retro and just baffled to the past few weeks heat, just trying to understand why some people have grown so obsessive over this explosion and why some are still hanging on to threads like it was their life blood. 

 

Makes no difference to me, I'm just concerned that someone is obsessing.

 

That's sweet

 

 

[RetroLee]

17 minutes ago, maryliddon said:

 

Everyone needs a hobby.

 

Come on, you could probably ask that question without accusing me of being in the pocket of BIG RETRO or the bitter loser in a fight for some four decade old pixels.

 

 

 

Sorry, no offense or implication intended.  If you successfully track down the proof you seek and the claimant is proved to own the IP, will you then accept this, possibly even apologize for the prolonging of this episode?  All said and done, if you discover the claimant owns the property and going forward, any other IP owner who asserts their ownership,  will you accept that they have the right to monitor, protect and license their property as they see fit?

YouTubers do seem to have become demigods that float on a cloud of self believed protection and righteousness and this is flattered by their adoring fans.  Whilst I respect and admire the works of "some" creators, a lot have grown outsized egos and believe they can do literally as they please and can work outside of the law.  "Fair use" and "parody" is fine when used within their defined parameters but it appears those terms are just used whenever and wherever to deflect arguments or unwanted attention.

Also and I know this will be an unwelcomed comment, but - if a "gentleman" of large, less than average looks and appearance had been the centre of this row, would he have attracted the same emotional and financial support that the young lady enjoyed?  In the past we've seen "similar" things happen to people of a male nature and they've been told to "man up" or laughed at.  It does feel like double standards from most people who didn't really care about alleged IP abuse, more wanting to just help the pretty lady.  I of course discuss with due respect but perhaps it needs to be put to discussion.

[Unofficial Who]

7 minutes ago, RetroLee said:

 

Sorry, no offense or implication intended.  If you successfully track down the proof you seek and the claimant is proved to own the IP, will you then accept this, possibly even apologize for the prolonging of this episode?  All said and done, if you discover the claimant owns the property and going forward, any other IP owner who asserts their ownership,  will you accept that they have the right to monitor, protect and license their property as they see fit?

 

 

A couple of pages back @maryliddon in fact said that his investigation might turn out to prove that the claimant does own the ip thus aiding him.

[Ste Pickford]

Christ.

[RetroLee]

1 minute ago, Unofficial Who said:

 

A couple of pages back @maryliddon in fact said that his investigation might turn out to prove that the claimant does own the ip thus aiding him.

 

@Unofficial Who - Apologies, I may have missed that.  I respectfully withdraw that question and appreciate your kind comment.

[Unofficial Who]

16 hours ago, maryliddon said:

 

I've been busy this week but will be back on it next week.

 

I think I have a clear idea of where the IP if owned, would have changed hands.

 

For each change of ownership, there would be a legal agreement showing the terms of that change.

 

To make a watertight case that you own the IP of an old game like this you would need copies of each those agreements.

 

Horace's IP has changed several times. The changes and accompanying agreements needed would be:

 

• William Tang creates Horace. Employment contract assigns rights to Beam
• Beam sold to Infogrames, purchase contract lists Horace as an IP
• Beam's sale to Krome, purchase contract showing that Beam IP stayed with Atari
• Atari's bankruptcy (2013), settlement showing the sale of IP to new Atari
• Sale to Andrews from new Atari, contract of sale of IP

 

It'd be highly unusual to have that level of proof for such an old game.

 

Sometimes the sale price can reflect the lack of provenance for what's sold. Sometimes the sale contract will say it's a case of buyer beware and there is no indemnification for the buyer if it turns out the IP didn't belong to the seller.

 

In terms of Horace? I'm pretty sure that William Tang's was working under an employment contract assigned anything he made to his employer Beam.

 

When I asked Alfred about the IP sold to Infogrames when they bought Beam, he said he doesn't remember Horace, or any of the older Beam games, being mentioned in the contract. I asked him if there may have been a catch-all in the contract saying all Beam IP was part of the sale. He said there might have been, but he can't clearly remember. It's possible someone may have that sale contract. I will dig.

 

Krome bought Beam from Infogrames. I know they said on Twitter that they don't own Horace, but I would love to see the purchase agreement to be sure that was the case. I need to talk to someone at Krome.

 

The Southern District of NY court handled Atari's bankruptcy. I have registered for a PACER account that means I'll be able to look at the documentation about Atari's bankruptcy. That account will be approved soon. During the bankruptcy, there was an IP auction, and I have seen a few lists of the IP on sale. I didn't know any Beam titles on those lists, but these are hardly definitive.

 

I have not seen Andrews IP purchase agreement. He won't share it or any details about what he owns and what documentation he has verifying a chain of ownership. I would like to see that contract

 

I did talk to Atari, and they said this IP does not belong to them and I should speak to William Tang. It is entirely possible they did own the IP, sold it to Andrews, but the person I was talking to wasn't aware of it.

 

So that's the framework I'm working within. As I said earlier it may well mean proving Andrews UK owns this stuff.

 

 

@RetroLee for your convenience from literally 16 hours ago. (edit, posted at the same time you did but yeah, he's said a few times if he can prove the chain of ownership is legit he'll post it.)

[maryliddon]

1 minute ago, RetroLee said:

 

Sorry, no offense or implication intended.  If you successfully track down the proof you seek and the claimant is proved to own the IP, will you then accept this, possibly even apologize for the prolonging of this episode?  All said and done, if you discover the claimant owns the property and going forward, any other IP owner who asserts their ownership,  will you accept that they have the right to monitor, protect and license their property as they see fit?

 

I've said I'll share whatever the outcome is, that'd only be fair, and have consistently said he may well own the rights. I'd be surprised if anyone Andrews UK really wants or needs an apology for a few posts on here though.

 

 

3 minutes ago, RetroLee said:

Nonsense slating youtubers

 

You're entitled to your opinion mate.

 

3 minutes ago, RetroLee said:

You're titamatised!

 

There's probably some of that going around but as I said my interest is outside of this specific incident.

 

That said you could argue that if this hadn't been handled so ineptly the stink wouldn't be so bad

 

 

[Flub]

7 minutes ago, RetroLee said:

 

Sorry, no offense or implication intended.  If you successfully track down the proof you seek and the claimant is proved to own the IP, will you then accept this, possibly even apologize for the prolonging of this episode? 

 

Jesus wept man. Have you listened to yourself?

 

Quote

Also and I know this will be an unwelcomed comment, but - if a "gentleman" of large, less than average looks and appearance had been the centre of this row, would he have attracted the same emotional and financial support that the young lady enjoyed?  In the past we've seen "similar" things happen to people of a male nature and they've been told to "man up" or laughed at.  It does feel like double standards from most people who didn't really care about alleged IP abuse, more wanting to just help the pretty lady.  I of course discuss with due respect but perhaps it needs to be put to discussion.

 

Really nailing your colours to the mast there fella.

[RetroLee]

6 minutes ago, maryliddon said:

There's probably some of that going around but as I said my interest is outside of this specific incident.

 

@maryliddon Okay, no worries and I respect your comments and appreciate you taking the time to converse.  This isn't my usual thing as like to so many I have social media anxieties and don't like to engage.  Really happy though that people are being respectful to me, that makes my time on line more comfortable.   

May I then ask, if your interest is outside of this incident; what part of it adds value to what you're looking at and indeed, what are you looking at?  Call me nosy but your dedication is fascinating.

[RetroLee]

@Flub - Sorry, not trying to be pretentious, just looking at a global view and sadly, pretty ladies, no matter how sexist it sounds, garner more apathy then men ever will in situations like this.  If I offended, I apologize.

[matt0]

"Just asking questions.

 

I find this interesting.

 

[something odd about women]

 

Thank you for your time."

[Flub]

6 minutes ago, RetroLee said:

@Flub - Sorry, not trying to be pretentious, just looking at a global view and sadly, pretty ladies, no matter how sexist it sounds, garner more apathy then men ever will in situations like this.  If I offended, I apologize.

 

It's allright Paul. Just if you stay here for longer than this thread you'll find that alt-right/incel talking points don't go across to well.

[RetroLee]

1 minute ago, Flub said:

 

It's allright Paul. Just if you stay here for longer than this thread you'll find that alt-right/incel talking points don't go across to well.

 

I'm not Paul.  This is why is generally pass on debates, everything has to become a conspiracy theory.  I'm asking questions in what I thought was an open conversation.  If you don't care for my presence, please just ignore me.

[maryliddon]

15 minutes ago, RetroLee said:

 

@maryliddon Okay, no worries and I respect your comments and appreciate you taking the time to converse.  This isn't my usual thing as like to so many I have social media anxieties and don't like to engage.  Really happy though that people are being respectful to me, that makes my time on line more comfortable.   

May I then ask, if your interest is outside of this incident; what part of it adds value to what you're looking at and indeed, what are you looking at?  Call me nosy but your dedication is fascinating.

 

I think that's self evident if you read the thread but my wider interest rights transference of old, possibly orphanned IP, was sparked by this incident.

 

Question for you: do you think this is worth looking into if there's a chance these rights are being wrongly asserted?

 

[Flub]

7 minutes ago, maryliddon said:

 

Question for you: do you think this is worth looking into if there's a chance these rights are being wrongly asserted?

 

 

I don't think you understand the seriousness of your actions Gaz. She has tits. Would you be doing the same if a man with big tits had done some videos about getting sexuals from Horace (Out of Horace and the Spiders). I don't think so you monster.

[maryliddon]

Might as well use this as the dumping ground for my half arsed retro inspired Columboing.

 

Sent this to Andres on the 23rd of October and got a read receipt. I'm trying to understand his claim to a number of trademarks.

 

No answer as yet.

 

Quote

Hi Paul, Hope you’re well.

I had some questions for you. You’re well within your rights to ignore these messages and before I ask any it’s only fair to say that this isn’t a private conversation.

Before starting I wanted to make it clear that this isn’t an attempt to harass or cause distress. It’s a series of questions about a subject I feel strongly about that I’m asking you in your role of MD of Andrews UK Ltd.

Here we go.

I’m confused by some of your trademarks and the extent of the rights you’re claiming for those trademarks.

I’ve carefully read the descriptions of the brands you own here:

https://retrotrader.com/brands/

They seem to fall into two two categories. There are brands where the site is very specific about the rights Subvert controls or owns and the chain of provenance for those rights. The various Automata marks, Sam Coupe, Dragon Computers, Epyx and others all fall into that grouping.

The second category are brands is where the extent of rights owned of controlled by Subvert isn’t isn’t clear nor is the the connection Subvert has to that brand beyond registering a trademark.

For example the ZX80 page in the section covering brands that Subvert owns says:
 

Quote

 

ZX80 – Was a home computer released in 1980. It was one in a line of home computers released by Sinclair Research. It featured black and white graphics!

 

 

 

There’s an acknowledgement that this brand is dertived from the Sinclair ZX-80 home computer but no description of what rights Subvert owns in relation to the brand.

In comparison the Sam Coupe brand is very clear about the rights that Subvert owns

 

 

Quote

 

Launched at the peak of the legendary 1980’s microcomputer rivalry, the Jupiter ACE was the most intriguing machine of them all. Created by the vexed designers of the iconic Sinclair

Spectrum home computer. The ACE was a significant machine running inspired software, but it struggled to compete in a marketplace increasingly dominated by home users wanting to play games with colour and sound. Find out more at [www.jupiterace.co.uk](http://www.jupiterace.co.uk/) we are the official master licensor for this brand.

 

 

 

There’s a similar vagueness with the Oric, ZX 80, ZX 81, Jet Set Willy, Manic Miner, and Ant Attack brands.

Are these trademarks you have registered without a commercial agreement with the owners of the IP the trademark was inspired by?

What rights do you own or control in regards to the following products:

* The Sinclair ZX-80 home computer
* The Sinclair ZX-81 home computer
* The Oric series of home computers
* The video game Jet Set Willy
* The video game Manic Miner
* The video game Ant Attack

And specifically with the Sinclair related trademarks, how would you describe your relationship with Sinclair Research Ltd when you applied for these trademarks?

Horace isn’t on the list of brands. Why not? Is that an accidental or intentional omission?

What rights do you own or control for the series of Horace games?

Who did you gain control of those rights from?

Which, of your many, companies purchased / licenced the Horace rights?

Which, of your many, companies currently own / control the Horace rights?

You have said that the rights for Horace persisted from Melbourne House through to Infogrames / Atari and now you have them.

When were the rights you hold bought from Inforgrames / Atari, by whom and what iteration of that company? (There’s been a few)

Did you buy all of Beam / Melbourne House’s IP or just Horace?

Phew! There’s a lot there.

Feel free to answer what you feel comfortable with, ignore this message or ask me any questions you want to.

Cheers

Gaz

 

[RetroLee]

5 minutes ago, maryliddon said:

Question for you: do you think this is worth looking into if there's a chance these rights are being wrongly asserted?

 

 

@maryliddon - Wow, I hadn't really pondered that until now.   I guess dependent on the value that an individual can place on something would determine whether or not to proceed with investing time and energy into something.  Personally on this if I were directly involved as the person who had the strikes, if I felt I were right, then yes of course I'd want to defend my position.  I would naturally speak with the claimant in person, privately, to enquire the legitimacy of the claim but would further consider the cost implications and whether that person would risk the embarrassment of being proved wrong.

As an outsider though I'd watch the progress and debate (as I am doing) with interest but further than just passing interest which will soon dissipate, I'd have no greater motivation in spending actual energy on something that held no benefit to me.

Thanks for making me ponder that though, an interesting moment in thought!

[maryliddon]

More basic question:

 

Would you prefer that an old IP like Horace was free to use throughout the retro community or controlled by a company strongly policing that IP?

 

 

 

 

[K]

Someone who's very new to retrogames has registered to Just Ask Some Questions that presuppose a very detailed knowledge of a very niche part of retrogaming that involves a very specific beef around IP ownership. If I was new to retrogames, my first port of call would definitely be to create an account on rllmuk to interrogate Gary Liddon about the Hungry Horace IP.

[Rex Grossman]

3 hours ago, RetroLee said:

Sorry @Lorfarius, no, I'm not "that" Lee.  Probably a bad choice of avatar actually.  Just a fan of WoS.    I'm quite new to retro and just baffled to the past few weeks heat, just trying to understand why some people have grown so obsessive over this explosion and why some are still hanging on to threads like it was their life blood. 

 

Makes no difference to me, I'm just concerned that someone is obsessing.

 

Creates account on a forum just to point out how obsessed other people are.

[RetroLee]

I've been nothing but respectful in my posts whilst conversing.  I've openly said I have anxieties so please don't add to those by questioning my motives for being here.  I took an interest in something, is that so wrong?  

[maryliddon]

There's nothing wrong in taking an interest in something and I do think it's rude to question someone's motives for doing so

 

BLANK LOOK

[Rex Grossman]

 

[RetroLee]

I was obviously mistaken that we would be discussing as adults.  Sorry, @maryliddon, I don't think this is a healthy place for me so I shall decline further conversation.  I do appreciate your time and discussion.  I wish you well in your en-devours.

[maryliddon]

Next

[maryliddon]

Well! I’m pretty sure I’ve never messaged or mentioned Paul Andrews on twitter but he blocked me today.

 

He also posted this:

 

 

 

 

[gone fishin]

Are we surprised that Atari are willing to sell any old shit after the VCS fiasco, even if they don't actually own it? 

 

"Can I buy the rights to the Horace games?"

 

"Sure, give €500 and you can have whatever you want". Turns to colleague and says "who is Horace?"