ICE: Re: Piecepack Pyramids

["a3141_temp_b_account" <a3141_temp_b_account@...>]

> From: "Ron Hale-Evans" <rwhe@...>
> > On Sat, Jun 01, 2002 at 04:21:22PM -0400, Kristin wrote:
> > Why they want to start a pyramid format war, and give gamers a 
choice >
> of pyramid formats, I really don't understand.

> In case I need to spell it out, the answer is simple: in each case,
> one is free (as in freedom: GNU/Linux or piecepack pyramids); the
> other is not (Microsoft Windows or Icehouse).

Ron, for being an FSF advocate (and employee of GNU), you didn't 
communicate
it well here.  But Buddha has already commented on it, so I won't.

Now, it seems to me like you are trying to do one or more things:

1. Get Andy to sue Tim Schutz and/or Mesomorph over the piecepack 
pyramids.
    Here, it would be my guess that you don't expect Andy's IceTowers 
patent
to hold up in court.  Since you claim "loads of prior art" through 
Pyramidis
and Focus (Domination), you would expect that the courts would 
overturn
Andy's patent on grounds of prior art and let Mesomorph produce 
pyramids.

Problems:
A.  Tim (who wrote the "any manufacturer" clause) and Mesomorph do 
NOT want
to go to court.  Andy does NOT want to go to court.  I'm not sure if 
both
Tim and Mesomorph say you can speak for them, I might be wrong and 
they both
love being in court.  Tim has stated that he was inspired by the 
Icehouse
pyramids, not Pyramidis.  This means that the piecepack pyramids are a
derivative work, and are under the patent.
B.  While you may be pursuing the lofty goal of restructuring the 
patent
office, you chose a really bad target.  Looney Labs is a small 
business, and
Andy Looney is an individual.  This is what the patent office was set 
up to
protect in the first place.  If you want to overturn the "evils" of 
patents,
pick a corporation that is abusing the patent office, not using it 
the way
it was intended.  Microsoft (which you seem to dislike, so I'll use 
it)
became monopolistic by swallowing smaller competitors, not larger 
ones.  Is
this what you are trying to get the piecepack producers to do?  Be 
like
Microsoft?
C.  You are also simultaneously scared (or pretending to be) that 
Looney
Labs will sue.  It would be odd to encourage a lawsuit at the same 
time.
D.  The patent covers more than you think.  "Stacking" and "nesting" 
are two
different terms in the patent (the distinction which was discussed 
elsewhere
as not being covered, but in fact is).  Even if the symbols on the 
piecepack
pyramids are hidden when they are stacked, why bother making them 
hollow?
To hide information?  If so, use the tiles, which would be much more
effective than the pyramids.  Personally, I think solid piecepack 
pyramids
would be more useful and have more heft.

2. Get the specifications for Icehouse pieces copylefted.
    You did say, after all, that since the rules for Icehouse games 
are
copyrighted, they are not free speech.  And if the specifications for 
the
Icehouse pieces were put in the public domain, there would be no 
lawsuit,
and Mesomorph would be free to manufacture and distribute whatever 
pyramids
they liked.

Problems:
A.  Looney Labs is a business, and the Icehouse pieces are one of its
products.  The specifications are in the public domain, as Dale has 
already
pointed out (though under restriction).  The piecepack specifications 
may be
in the public domain, but only the public domain.  I found no 
reference to
them being GPLd, LGPLd, or anything else of the sort.  Why?  Because
Mesomorph would not be allowed to charge a profit under the GPL 
(Terms, Item
1).  Are you going to insist that the Piecepack be GPLd?  Do you think
Mesomorph would carry a product that they were not allowed to turn a 
profit
on, except warranties?  No, they would not, since that is not a way 
to run a
business.
B.  Forcing another company to conform to standards that you have not
encouraged on companies you endorse is a very sneaky way of stopping
free-market competition.
C.  A person can grab the Icehouse specifications and make as many 
pyramids
as they want, but not sell them (for much) until the patent expires.  
If you
are willing to wait, you can publish whatever you feel like.  In the
meantime, respect the intention of US law and allow individuals and 
small
businesses to compete against larger, more resourceful companies.

3. Have the piecepack pyramids and Icehouse pyramids peacefully 
coexist.
    You could say that Andy started this argument by putting up his 
article
on Patents and Lawsuits.  If both sides agreed to make games 
together, there
wouldn't have to be a lawsuit.

Problems:
A.  If piecepack pyramids do infringe on Andy's patent, then he has to
defend them now, or risk dilution.  If, later, some large toy 
manufacturer
begins mass-producing pyramids, they can defend against any Looney 
Labs
lawsuit by pointing out that Looney Labs did not defend against 
initial
patent violations.
B.  Andy put up that article due to YOUR questions, Ron.  You asked 
if he
would sue, and he gave you a reply which you didn't like.
C.  No one at Looney Labs (or in the Icehouse community) has any 
problems
with Icehouse pieces being used in Piecepack games.  Kristin 
said "Why start
a format war?" to which you stated a position of free versus non-free.
Noble stance, but if the Icehouse pyramids sold for $2 a stash, do 
you think
piecepack pyramids would exist?
D.  Still, free versus non-free?  Good point, that means that if 
someone
comes up with a great game using the aspects of the pyramids, that 
person
cannot publish that game, just the rules.  But once again, this is 
hardware,
not software.  The patent will expire eventually.  Why make a big 
deal of
this now when it will not even matter in a few years?
E.  I personally have no problem with some kind of pyramids being in 
the
piecepack set.  But rather than just semi-copy the Icehouse pyramids 
(which
would lend a lot of credence to any lawsuit), come up with something 
more
original, and do whatever the piecepack community wants to do with it.

4. You are trying to start an argument.
    And a fine job has been done of that.

Problems:
A.  You have better things to do.  I really don't think you would 
spend all
your time making long posts just to annoy a few people.

5. Get Andy (and Looney Labs) to give up their patent.
    No patent, no lawsuit.

Problems:
A.  Once again, the patent is not there to prevent others from making 
their
own pyramids, but corporations from making and selling pyramids.  I've
explained this point enough by now, I hope.

Summation:
Ron, you have never owned a small business.  You have never worked 
for a
small business (judging by your resume).  Huge numbers of small 
businesses
fail because they have no way to defend themselves against larger
competitors.  Looney Labs is a small business that has amazingly 
survived
and is prospering because it has good merchandise and a way to 
protect that
merchandise from competitors.  That protection is US law, put there 
to help
small businesses.  Just because large corporations have found a way to
exploit that does not mean that the mere use of that protection is 
immoral.
When you start your own small business, you can release whatever you 
like
under whatever license you want.  Until then, let Looney Labs work 
like a
business.

Ron, you are the most vocal person in the Piecepack group.  I don't 
think
that means you represent the group.  I like the Piecepack (even if I 
think
the dice are a bit silly to include).  You have this impression that 
Looney
Labs is a faceless corporation that is trying to eliminate any 
competition.
They are not.  The fact that you loudly present this viewpoint is very
damaging to the Piecepack community, much more so than to the Icehouse
community.  I've firmly placed myself in the Icehouse community 
because
there are no such vocal, damaging zealots in it (although Adam 
Norberg has
come very close).  I can't speak for the Piecepack community, but I 
doubt
that they are as fired up over this as you are.  They do not seem to 
be.

Do you really think that continuing this argument will lead to a 
change in
the policy of Looney Labs before it leads to a change in the 
attitudes of
the members of the Icehouse and Piecepack communities?  Are you 
willing to
take on the sole responsibility of driving away members of either 
community?
Do you think either community would elect you to do so?

That's it, I'm done.  I'm as tired of this argument as Eeyore is, and 
have
been for some time.  If anyone want to discuss finer points with me, 
take it
off the lists.  I've done my best to be error free, so please do 
point out
where I am wrong.


Good Liam
Temporary Yahoo account.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
This message was posted to the Icehouse Discussion List.
This list is hosted by Looney Labs - visit our online list robot at
http://wunderland.com/fred3/icehouse to subscribe or unsubscribe.
--------------------------------------------------------------------