Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

GFA, ASM, STOS, ...

Moderators: exxos, simonsunnyboy, Mug UK, Zorro 2, Moderator Team

User avatar
Eero Tamminen
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1558
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 1:11 pm

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby Eero Tamminen » Tue Mar 07, 2017 9:35 pm

1st1 wrote:It's fascinating that we now can reproduce original ROMs for ST, STE and TT, but I think due to unsolved licence of TOS the best way would be to continue with EmuTOS, to make it capable of doing everything what original TOS can do on the related machine. In my mind at least the following things are missing:
- SCSI support in TT/Falcon
- Some other TT related stuff
- Some other Falcon related stuff


There a quite a few things missing from Falcon support:
- VDI: VSetMask() and VDI support for HiColor modes
- XBios: All the Dsp_* functions (32 of them) and sound matrix integration for DSP
- AES: Extra AES OS functions from TOS v3 / v4 (menu_* functions added in TOS v3, and AES objc_sysvar i.e. TOS v4 3D look) + few missing RSC features
- Desktop: I think the largest feature still missing is user keyboard bindings

One can use alternative desktop, 16-bit VDI support could be worked around by using external (e.g. fVDI) VDI driver that supports 16-bit, and not that many applications use TOS v3/v4 specific features (or work without them). -> The missing DSP support is the main issue for Falcon.

User avatar
wongck
Ultimate Atarian
Ultimate Atarian
Posts: 11990
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 2:09 pm
Location: Far East
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby wongck » Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:03 pm

US companies may now have to be very careful where the information is going to.
After Trump got promoted to full president, the company I am working with suddenly have several dealing with several US companies cancelled due to "security" reasons. Major policy changes not known to public.
So it may especially difficult currently to ask for stuff that are in NDA or Copyrighted etc
My Stuff: FB/Falcon CT63+CTPCI_ATI_RTL8139 14+512MB 30GB HDD CF HxC_SD/ TT030 68882 4+32MB 520MB Nova/ 520STFM 4MB Tos206 SCSI
Shared SCSI Bus:ScsiLink ethernet, 9GB HDD,SD-reader @ http://phsw.atari.org
My Atari stuff for sale - click here for list

User avatar
EmpireAndrew
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 397
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 5:46 pm
Location: NYC, USA

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby EmpireAndrew » Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:28 pm

Do not wake up the sleeping bear.

Asking them for permission is not a good idea.
It costs nothing to send a legal denial letter.

No-one is going to give up anything, especially when Atari is now nothing more than patents and IP.

Those kinds of people don't care about community or hobbyists.
Just do whatever you want but don't charge for anything. You may not be on good legal ground but you'll stay under the radar and orally (at least by my compass) you'll be better off.
1977 VCS Heavy Sixxer (Boxed)
1990 Atari 1040STE, 4MB, UltraSatan, TOS 2.06, TT Touch -> Atari SC1435 Colour CRT Monitor
1991 Atari TT030, 2/64MB, Int 8GB Gigafile SCSI2CF, TOS 3.06, CaTTamaran Accelerator -> Atari TTM195 19" Mono CRT Monitor
1993 Atari Falcon030, 14MB, Int 4GB IDE2SD, TOS 4.04 -> Atari PTC1426 Color CRT Monitor
Amiga, Mac, DOS, Newton, SGI, Sun, NeXTStation and more!

BlankVector
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 401
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 7:52 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby BlankVector » Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:39 pm

AtariZoll wrote:Here is image:

To close that out of band question related to EmuTOS:
- The partition was indeed an Extended (non-Primary) MBR partition
- EmuTOS supports Extended partitions only since version 0.9.7 (last release)
- The partition was corrupted, this is why even new EmuTOS refused to mount it
- Dfree() (used in disk info dialog) has just been greatly improved thanks to your report. See latest snapshot.

User avatar
wongck
Ultimate Atarian
Ultimate Atarian
Posts: 11990
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 2:09 pm
Location: Far East
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby wongck » Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:40 pm

mfro wrote:I recently asked AMD support if they would be willing to release the programmer's documentation for old PCI Radeon cards since they have released documentation for many newer chips already and there is no commercial value in it anymore. My (really friendly) contact appeared helpful, asked what I would need exactly and promised to come back with available infos after a few days. Which he did - with the information that AMD doesn't have any ATI documentation anymore.

I then asked whether it would be possible to release somebody from an NDA he signed back then and still has the docs. The contact again promised to come back again (and really did). Then the answer was basically: "go away".

Guess whom he talked to?


No one..... because

With any merger (reads as acquisition) the company being acquired will take in all the other company staff... only to lay them off slowly over time. So in ATI case, it may be true that none of the older document will left. And the number of people knowing that information will be moving on...
My Stuff: FB/Falcon CT63+CTPCI_ATI_RTL8139 14+512MB 30GB HDD CF HxC_SD/ TT030 68882 4+32MB 520MB Nova/ 520STFM 4MB Tos206 SCSI
Shared SCSI Bus:ScsiLink ethernet, 9GB HDD,SD-reader @ http://phsw.atari.org
My Atari stuff for sale - click here for list

ijor
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3138
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby ijor » Wed Mar 08, 2017 1:37 am

lp wrote:I once talked to a well known software author about this very topic. It comes down to damages. Atari has not sold or supported TOS for over 20 years, therefore cannot prove any finical damages whatsoever. Nor can they prove any illegal activity has harmed the company or their reputation in any way. All they can really do is sit back an watch it happen.


Sorry lp, but this is so wrong.

What you say might be relevant on a trail for compensatory damages. It doesn't make any difference whatsoever on their rights to enforce their IP is not infringed. It doesn't matter at all for this purpose if there has been any damage or not. Infringing is illegal. They tolerate, they might not know, or they might not care. That doesn't mean they could act otherwise.

If what you say is true, it would mean that abandonware is legal, and we all know it is not. Furthermore, it would mean that GPL couldn't be enforced because almost never there are any damages when violating GPL. Ask the FSF is they can't sue somebody violating GPL.

B&C ComputerVisions sells a CD on ebay with leaked TOS sources among other questionable things for years. They will say the cost is for the media, but would an IP lawyer agree. Clearly B&C is not worried about infringing any copyrights, nor any lawyers knocking on their door.


1 - I can bet that Atari has no idea about what B&C is selling, and about the exact content of that CD.
2 - B&C might be not worried, but I'm sure he is not writing a letter to Atari asking for permission.

The latter is the main point. That's what we are debating here. Not how risky is the situation now. But how risky is to ask Atari.

User avatar
Frank B
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 901
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:28 am
Location: Boston

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby Frank B » Wed Mar 08, 2017 2:18 am

What about trying to go through the FSF to see if we can get an updated release? If the original V1.0 sources are already GPLED.

User avatar
lp
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2257
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:09 pm
Location: GFA Headquarters
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby lp » Wed Mar 08, 2017 2:36 am

ijor wrote:
lp wrote:I once talked to a well known software author about this very topic. It comes down to damages. Atari has not sold or supported TOS for over 20 years, therefore cannot prove any finical damages whatsoever. Nor can they prove any illegal activity has harmed the company or their reputation in any way. All they can really do is sit back an watch it happen.


Sorry lp, but this is so wrong.

What you say might be relevant on a trail for compensatory damages. It doesn't make any difference whatsoever on their rights to enforce their IP is not infringed. It doesn't matter at all for this purpose if there has been any damage or not. Infringing is illegal. They tolerate, they might not know, or they might not care. That doesn't mean they could act otherwise.

If what you say is true, it would mean that abandonware is legal, and we all know it is not. Furthermore, it would mean that GPL couldn't be enforced because almost never there are any damages when violating GPL. Ask the FSF is they can't sue somebody violating GPL.

B&C ComputerVisions sells a CD on ebay with leaked TOS sources among other questionable things for years. They will say the cost is for the media, but would an IP lawyer agree. Clearly B&C is not worried about infringing any copyrights, nor any lawyers knocking on their door.


1 - I can bet that Atari has no idea about what B&C is selling, and about the exact content of that CD.
2 - B&C might be not worried, but I'm sure he is not writing a letter to Atari asking for permission.

The latter is the main point. That's what we are debating here. Not how risky is the situation now. But how risky is to ask Atari.


Well you are entitled to your opinion. I didn't say it made anything legal, you are inferring that. Seeing how it's well known they don't have the source code anymore anyway, I find the risk thing hilarious. So someone writes Atari asking about a long lost piece of code, code they lost or never had in the first place, code they would have to leach off the net themselves if asked to produce it in court, and all hell breaks loose.

ijor
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3138
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby ijor » Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:02 am

lp wrote:Well you are entitled to your opinion. I didn't say it made anything legal, you are inferring that. Seeing how it's well known they don't have the source code anymore anyway, I find the risk thing hilarious. So someone writes Atari asking about a long lost piece of code, code they lost or never had in the first place, code they would have to leach off the net themselves if asked to produce it in court, and all hell breaks loose.


What are you talking about? They don't have to prove anything. This is not a case where there is any doubt about the copyright holder. There might be some doubts about damage, or about the infringing being knowingly or not, but there is no doubts whatsoever in this case about the rights themselves.

And this is not about the TOS sources. You ask them about TOS, but as a consequence of this they might decide to go after everything related to Atari classic IP.

Lastly, things don't need to reach the court to be terribly bad. What you would do if you receive a "Cease and desist" letter from Atari? What do you think others would do? Would you dare to ignore them, hire a lawyer and go to court? Well, may be you will, I don't know. But just everybody else, would likely cease and desist immediately.

And even if you don't obey the letter, the law after the DMCA gives them plenty of power. Under the new law they can get results without proving anything. They can go after your IP and your server would be shutdown. They can demand to Google to stop crawling and listing your site. Didn't you see Google's DMCA notice on some searches. Do you think they are all orders coming from a judge? They are not.

Now, will this actually happen? Probably not. But there is a risk, and the reward is not worth.

User avatar
lp
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2257
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:09 pm
Location: GFA Headquarters
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby lp » Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:17 am

I'll worry about it on that day a "Cease and desist" notice arrives, until then it sounds like paranoia to me over a simple inquiry.

User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby 1st1 » Wed Mar 08, 2017 6:34 am

Frank B wrote:What about trying to go through the FSF to see if we can get an updated release? If the original V1.0 sources are already GPLED.


No, it's not. Digital Research GEM was gpled. But not the ATARI "fork". When you take an old PC and start GEM/1, GEM/2 or GEM/3 onto it you will see a lot of differences already in the user interface, and there is for example output.app for printing from any application. It's very very different, also technically as PC GEM has to handle with some limitations of the PC architecture like 64 kB segments in 8086 mode and so on.

But talking to Richard Stallman might be a good idea.
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 2x Falcon 030 32GB/14MB+ScrnBlstrIII * 2x TT030 73GB/20MB+Nova * 520/1040STFM * 520/1040STE * 260/520ST/+ * some Mega ST * 2x Mega STE 500MB/4MB+M.CoCo * Stacy * STBook * SLM605 * SLM804 * SLM605 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3

User avatar
troed
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:20 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby troed » Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:27 am

lp wrote:I'll worry about it on that day a "Cease and desist" notice arrives, until then it sounds like paranoia to me over a simple inquiry.


Such letters have already been sent to forums with "Atari" in their name. It wasn't clear such forums could continue as they were. Atari is very protective of their IP (the only thing they make money on).

/Troed

User avatar
lp
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2257
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 11:09 pm
Location: GFA Headquarters
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby lp » Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:56 am

The trademark name "Atari" is a different type of asset. Yes, no one disputes that they actively peruse that.

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1421
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby dlfrsilver » Mon Mar 13, 2017 8:38 am

troed wrote:
lp wrote:I'll worry about it on that day a "Cease and desist" notice arrives, until then it sounds like paranoia to me over a simple inquiry.


Such letters have already been sent to forums with "Atari" in their name. It wasn't clear such forums could continue as they were. Atari is very protective of their IP (the only thing they make money on).

/Troed


One question, Atari Today (ex-infogrames) is a french company making video games. The old Atari computer manufacturer is dead.

Can you enlight on this matter ?
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1421
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby dlfrsilver » Mon Mar 13, 2017 8:54 am

i have found that Atari SA (ex infogrames interactive) is closed and doesn't exists anymore.
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

User avatar
troed
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:20 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby troed » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:12 am

dlfrsilver wrote:One question, Atari Today (ex-infogrames) is a french company making video games. The old Atari computer manufacturer is dead.

Can you enlight on this matter ?


Intellectual property rights are usually sold long before companies "die", but who would currently own TOS would need some digging.

More information might be able to deduce from here: http://www.atari-investisseurs.fr/a-propos/?lang=en

/Troed

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1421
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby dlfrsilver » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:38 am

that's very interesting. Basically, the link you found is related to the software IP from Atari, but nothing from Atari Corp, which took care of the computers manufacturing.

The Atari games part has nothing to do with the Atari Hardware branch.

EDIT : after a bit more check, it appears Atari today only relies on the software IP from old Atari Games.
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

User avatar
troed
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:20 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby troed » Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:42 am

dlfrsilver wrote:that's very interesting. Basically, the link you found is related to the software IP from Atari, but nothing from Atari Corp, which took care of the computers manufacturing.

The Atari games part has nothing to do with the Atari Hardware branch. Those have always been dinstinct.


I don't follow. Atari Corp IP was sold to Hasbro, then to Infogrames, and that's who (after restructuring) now are the Atari Social Casino company I linked to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari#As_ ... .932000.29

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1421
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby dlfrsilver » Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:15 pm

yes i have looked a bit further and found the same as you did.

But honestly, since the Atari ST/E, falcon machines are all dead and buried, no one will go against ST/STE/falcon users. There's no money to do, and the machines are in the hands of a small bunch of people.

Atari Casino would be damn silly and stupid to harm anyone in this communauty just because of TOS enhancements.
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

User avatar
troed
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:20 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby troed » Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:19 pm

dlfrsilver wrote:no one will go against ST/STE/falcon users. There's no money to do, and the machines are in the hands of a small bunch of people.Atari Casino would be damn silly and stupid to harm anyone in this communauty just because of TOS enhancements.


That's not how corporate IP works. Especially not in a corporation that's squarely about its IP. No company lawyer will ever say "we probably will never use this, so it's fine" if there's no reason why they should.

So, don't ask.

User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby 1st1 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:34 pm

dlfrsilver wrote:i have found that Atari SA (ex infogrames interactive) is closed and doesn't exists anymore.

Their USA daughter companay is still alive, more or less. But they are independent now from any remainings of Atari SA (if there is any remaining).
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 2x Falcon 030 32GB/14MB+ScrnBlstrIII * 2x TT030 73GB/20MB+Nova * 520/1040STFM * 520/1040STE * 260/520ST/+ * some Mega ST * 2x Mega STE 500MB/4MB+M.CoCo * Stacy * STBook * SLM605 * SLM804 * SLM605 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3

User avatar
troed
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:20 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby troed » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:37 pm

1st1 wrote:
dlfrsilver wrote:i have found that Atari SA (ex infogrames interactive) is closed and doesn't exists anymore.

Their USA daughter companay is still alive, more or less. But they are independent now from any remainings of Atari SA (if there is any remaining).


No, please read the full thread. The Atari USA company that used to exist is fully incorporated and part of the current Atari I linked (and hasn't existed as a separate entity since 2008).

User avatar
1st1
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 692
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:48 am

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby 1st1 » Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:49 pm

That does not mean anything different than I told. I only did not know that this is "ATARI Casino" *laugh* now.
Power without the Price. It's not a bug. It's a feature. _/|\_ATARI

1040STFM in PC-Tower (PAK68/2, OvrScn, 4 MB, 1GB SCSI, CD-ROM...) * 2x Falcon 030 32GB/14MB+ScrnBlstrIII * 2x TT030 73GB/20MB+Nova * 520/1040STFM * 520/1040STE * 260/520ST/+ * some Mega ST * 2x Mega STE 500MB/4MB+M.CoCo * Stacy * STBook * SLM605 * SLM804 * SLM605 * SMM804 * SH 204/205 * Megafile 30/44/60 * SF314 * SF354 * 5x Pofo * PC3

User avatar
troed
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1213
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:20 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby troed » Mon Mar 13, 2017 2:08 pm

1st1 wrote:That does not mean anything different than I told. I only did not know that this is "ATARI Casino" *laugh* now.


Why does every thread with you in it end up in someone having to tell you that you're wrong?

You're wrong. Absolutely everything you wrote in your post was wrong.

Their USA daughter companay is still alive


Not as referenced in that sentence.

they are independent now from any remainings of Atari SA


No.

Atari SA (if there is any remaining)


There is.

... and all of this knowledge already existed in the thread when you made your post.

bocke
Atarian
Atarian
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 4:09 pm

Re: Future source-code patches for TOS 2.06/3.06

Postby bocke » Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:14 pm

Hi guys. Sorry for jumping in without much forum history. I'm ocassionally lurking on the forums. A lot of interesting stuff on AF, but I have yet to work on my recently bought STF so I'm mostly reading all the wise stuff the others post. :) This interested me as I have some experience with libre and open source software (for one, I am a long-time Linux user - more than 15y).

To get back on the topic. This can't be legal in any way. Even making patches to leaked code may be illegal as that proves you've seen the code. Other companies have reacted more actively when their property was leaked in a similar way. Microsoft and Opera are recent examples (a version of "Windows NT" and a version of "Opera" sources were leaked in recent years, both have been taken down promptly).

While Atari doesn't exists anymore, IP is still floating around somewhere. So, changing the leaked source doesn't make it legal.

I think combining EmuTOS with this just taints EmuTOS. And breaks both GPL and Atari IP. Anyone who ever worked on EmuTOS should definitely stay clear from those sources, too.

I think it would be more appropriate to direct your ambition into working on EmuTOS. Unless you already had contact with stolen/leaked IP.

Nothing actually stops you from doing this, but the result won't be legal. And it's distribution might as well be illegal. Will someone act upon it doesn't really matter. It would still be legally chalenged even if no one reacts in any way.

Asking Atari to open source TOS 2.x/3.x might be ok if you don't aknowledge you know anything about leaks. Will they do it doesn't really matter. But it's more likely you are going to get response than if you ask them to legalize leaked source code "for non-commercial use". And I'm not sure that's even legally possible or if it makes any sense at all.

Just my 5 (euro)cents. :cheers:


Social Media

     

Return to “Coding”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest