Good bye

Latest news in the Atari world

Moderators: Mug UK, Silver Surfer, Moderator Team

User avatar
GokMasE
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 221
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 11:16 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby GokMasE » Sat Aug 17, 2019 6:51 pm

havoc wrote:Uhh, but what we do is like the diametric opposite of clinging on to outdated data? Any user is welcome to suggest updates to the data on our site. Rajah in fact has made such suggestions and we happily accepted those.


I was quite obviously referring to this particular case rather than how things are setup to work in general - and this time it does seem to be exactly what is happening.
Since the data in questions was outdated and Rajah's request to take it down (from what I gather he didn't request to update it) was denied - well, then it is obviously preferred to cling on to old/inaccurate data rather than deleting it.

Again, the whole situation is plain silly. I just understand the reasoning behind the decision to deny Rajah's request even less than Rajah's emotional (over)reaction.

vido
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:39 pm

Re: Good bye

Postby vido » Sat Aug 17, 2019 8:48 pm

havoc wrote:
I find it even harder to understand why those in charge of these websites find it so important to cling on to outdated data out of principle.

Uhh, but what we do is like the diametric opposite of clinging on to outdated data? Any user is welcome to suggest updates to the data on our site. Rajah in fact has made such suggestions and we happily accepted those.

This is just arogant attitude! I dont care if Rajah has rights or not to request the entry to be removed, but it would be polite and showing some respect to the author of the software if you would respect his will. If you accept updates to the data then you should also accept deletion request.

User avatar
calimero
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2310
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:01 am
Location: STara Pazova, Serbia
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby calimero » Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:35 pm

havoc wrote:
Authors of demoozo was pissoff by admins of pouet so they create their own site to be “better” then pouet and at the end they are same!

Sorry but that's pure nonsense. We (Pouet) kindly donated our entire database to Demozoo as a starting point for their efforts. Furthermore, a whole bunch of staff are active on both sites, we link to eachother's sites extensively, etc etc. Get your facts straight plz :)

My bad!
I remember (probably badly) of interview with two guy talking about planing Demozoo website because of some disagreement with Pouet management. Like I said, my memory is probably wrong... Thanks for clarification.

I don't blame Lotek for giving up on replying to Rajah's never changing complaints because Rajah does not seem to want to consider any argument but his own.


So Lotek and Rajah was communicate about removing Rajahs software and Lotek refuse to remove it from Demozoo?

havoc wrote:...getting Rajah what he wants but cannot get ...

Lotek: what IS the argument for not "giving Rajah what he wants"?

havoc wrote:... available information and arguments from both sides years ago ...

If someone type: "atari lotek rajah havoc" in Google, two links will be there:

-- viewtopic.php?f=2&t=37244 (5 days old)
and
-- https://demozoo.org/forums/post/1499/ (4 years old)

Wow! So this is going on for years between Lotek and Rajah?!?

Can we hear THE argument? :) (or please point where this argument can be found publicly?)

Why the hell Lotek simple do not remove Rajah stuff?! What is Lotek side of story?
Lotek did wonderful job in collecting and cataloging immersive number of stuff but why he simple do not remove few entries from _active_ developer?!? This who situation look like something small, at start, that exploded to personal vendetta... really a Monthy Python situation...
using Atari since 1986.http://wet.atari.orghttp://milan.kovac.cc/atari/software/ ・ Atari Falcon030/CT63/SV ・ Atari STe ・ Atari Mega4/MegaFile30/SM124 ・ Amiga 1200/PPC ・ Amiga 500 ・ C64 ・ ZX Spectrum ・ RPi ・ MagiC! ・ MiNT 1.18 ・ OS X

User avatar
calimero
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2310
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 10:01 am
Location: STara Pazova, Serbia
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby calimero » Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:39 pm

Symoon wrote:Be realistic: authors can't spend their lives tracking websites that dumped their websites without asking, and "suggest updates".

This is special topic: -- two way links --

We are stuck with this still-born child from Tim Berners Lee for decades now! ...while we could have something much more functional:

https://readwrite.com/2003/09/17/ted_nelsons_two/

and this ENTIRE topic is consequence of this WWW mess! If we have two way links, Rajah could maintained link easily and he will be aware who and in what context link, or mentioned, his published work. He could even receive micro-payments based on his work!
using Atari since 1986.http://wet.atari.orghttp://milan.kovac.cc/atari/software/ ・ Atari Falcon030/CT63/SV ・ Atari STe ・ Atari Mega4/MegaFile30/SM124 ・ Amiga 1200/PPC ・ Amiga 500 ・ C64 ・ ZX Spectrum ・ RPi ・ MagiC! ・ MiNT 1.18 ・ OS X

User avatar
wongck
Ultimate Atarian
Ultimate Atarian
Posts: 12787
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 2:09 pm
Location: Far East
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby wongck » Mon Aug 19, 2019 12:31 am

calimero wrote:This is special topic: -- two way links --

weird stuff...
You pay to maintain a website and you let other people come make changes because of what you display.
If you replace website with your house, I don't think anyone allow others to come change the stuff they displayed at home.

Issue here is that the stuff still in the database of the owner even it is not displayed.
My Stuff: FB/Falcon CT63 CTPCI ATI RTL8139 USB 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
viking272
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:50 pm
Location: west of London, UK

Re: Good bye

Postby viking272 » Sun Sep 08, 2019 7:29 am

The admins of Demozoo and Pouet are being rediculous in this matter.

They have taken and published work that the author has put in the public domain.
This does IMO grant websites, publications the right to comment, link and discuss the titles. Hosting the files is not reasonable when the author maintains his own site and updates the titles.

Rajah raised issues with the obsolete software and tried to take reasonable steps to remedy this situation, by asking the titles and pages be removed.
The admins of the websites have deliberately ignored the requests and it looks like work has been done to restore pages and deactivate Rajah's account.

Who do they think they are? Some elevated status that allows them to dictate how they see things ignoring the pleas of the author?
The software also isn't particularly relevant to the genre, a demo site putting up old applications, but then taking offense at the request for the pages to be removed.

A reasonable and sane admin surely would of apologised and removed them? What are they trying to achieve and protect here?

I also believe (as mentioned earlier by mlynn) that this falls under the right of erasure as outlined in Article 17 of GDPR. Personal data definitions include any data that can identify the subject matter, as in this case it is the software.
Furthermore the private and public requests from Rajah for erasure of this data from Demozoo and Pouet would constitute an erasure request. A key part of such a request is that consent for their data is withdrawn. This withdrawal request has been stated in the original post on 14 August 2019.

Such requests do not need to state GDPR, Article 17 or the right to erasure, just that they wish their data to be removed.
The data controllers at Demozoo and Pouet have 30 days to action the request from the date of the request, unless there are mitigating factors suggesting the data should not be removed. I believe there are none.

Ignoring such a request can have damaging affects but this will be decided by a court.

In this first instance I think the best course of action is that the pages referenced from Rajah are removed from Pouet and Demozoo by 14 September 2019 and an apology is issued by both sites, not for creating the pages but for how they've approached the removal requests.

Demozoo and Pouet admins, please do the right thing here.

User avatar
christos
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2455
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:24 pm
Location: Greece
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby christos » Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:28 am

viking272 wrote:The admins of Demozoo and Pouet are being rediculous in this matter.

They have taken and published work that the author has put in the public domain.
This does IMO grant websites, publications the right to comment, link and discuss the titles. Hosting the files is not reasonable when the author maintains his own site and updates the titles.

Rajah raised issues with the obsolete software and tried to take reasonable steps to remedy this situation, by asking the titles and pages be removed.
The admins of the websites have deliberately ignored the requests and it looks like work has been done to restore pages and deactivate Rajah's account.

Who do they think they are? Some elevated status that allows them to dictate how they see things ignoring the pleas of the author?
The software also isn't particularly relevant to the genre, a demo site putting up old applications, but then taking offense at the request for the pages to be removed.

A reasonable and sane admin surely would of apologised and removed them? What are they trying to achieve and protect here?

I also believe (as mentioned earlier by mlynn) that this falls under the right of erasure as outlined in Article 17 of GDPR. Personal data definitions include any data that can identify the subject matter, as in this case it is the software.
Furthermore the private and public requests from Rajah for erasure of this data from Demozoo and Pouet would constitute an erasure request. A key part of such a request is that consent for their data is withdrawn. This withdrawal request has been stated in the original post on 14 August 2019.

Such requests do not need to state GDPR, Article 17 or the right to erasure, just that they wish their data to be removed.
The data controllers at Demozoo and Pouet have 30 days to action the request from the date of the request, unless there are mitigating factors suggesting the data should not be removed. I believe there are none.

Ignoring such a request can have damaging affects but this will be decided by a court.

In this first instance I think the best course of action is that the pages referenced from Rajah are removed from Pouet and Demozoo by 14 September 2019 and an apology is issued by both sites, not for creating the pages but for how they've approached the removal requests.

Demozoo and Pouet admins, please do the right thing here.


Hi, are you a lawyer? Because in my understanding, GDPR doesn't apply to online communities and to public information.

User avatar
TheNameOfTheGame
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1339
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:57 pm
Location: Almost Heaven, West Virginia

Re: Good bye

Postby TheNameOfTheGame » Sun Sep 08, 2019 12:40 pm

Just using common sense and appreciating the fact that Rajah is(was) still an active developer, I would think it would be prudent to just accept his request and not upset him to the point of him leaving the community.

To do otherwise as the websites involved have done appears very selfish and short-sighted. It's all very regrettable. I was using Litchi yesterday and thought of a feature request then realized, crap I can't do that anymore. That sucks. :(

User avatar
shoggoth
Nature
Nature
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 9:21 am
Location: Halmstad, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby shoggoth » Sun Sep 08, 2019 5:18 pm

I fail to see the point in punishing your own user base because of something someone else did.
Ain't no space like PeP-space.

User avatar
TheNameOfTheGame
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1339
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:57 pm
Location: Almost Heaven, West Virginia

Re: Good bye

Postby TheNameOfTheGame » Sun Sep 08, 2019 5:56 pm

shoggoth wrote:I fail to see the point in punishing your own user base because of something someone else did.


Yes, that also. No one wins here and neither side of those feuding wants to budge.

User avatar
SoundDoctor
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:24 pm

Re: Good bye

Postby SoundDoctor » Sun Sep 08, 2019 6:20 pm

[/quote]

Hi, are you a lawyer? Because in my understanding, GDPR doesn't apply to online communities and to public information.[/quote]

Just to be clear, GDPR applies to everyone who collects and processes data concerning any other individual for any reason other than private, domestic, or household reasons.
It doesn’t need to be ‘private’ information – even information which is public knowledge or is about someone’s professional life can be personal data.

This spat is pretty silly TBH but it is true that the websites concerned are on the wrong side of the intention of the law.

If the OP had the funds to test the law I’d bet money on a court finding in his favour.
TT030 10mb/16mb/1Gb, Coco. Falcon 030 Stock 14mb (Lynxman), 1Gb CF. Falcon 030 Stock 14mb (Atari) 170mb IDE. Mega 1 big button (mash up badged Mega 4) 4mb (home cooked RAM upgrade) ICD ADSpeed ST OverScan. Mega 2 big button (4mb), Mega 1 small button (4mb home cooked 72pin SIMM slot), 520 STe (SIPPs), 520 STFM (4mb using a Falcon 4mb board + Blitter).

User avatar
christos
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2455
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:24 pm
Location: Greece
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby christos » Sun Sep 08, 2019 8:52 pm

Good to know. I thought it had different provisions for those purposes.

User avatar
SoundDoctor
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 303
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:24 pm

Re: Good bye

Postby SoundDoctor » Sun Sep 08, 2019 10:28 pm

christos wrote:Good to know. I thought it had different provisions for those purposes.

christos wrote:Good to know. I thought it had different provisions for those purposes.


I think a lot of people make that assumption. There is no such thing as ‘implied consent’.

You can keep a private list of addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, and other personal details of, for example, plumbers, car mechanics, builders, electricians, tutors etc that you use for domestic repairs or guitar lessons or whatever, no problem.

Put that same list on your hobby website that recommends local services and it’s a totally different matter. Unless you have full legal consent from each individual and have given them a clear statement explaining how you are safeguarding, managing, and processing their personal data then you are totally on the wrong side of the law. If they were to ask you to remove their data then the very very wise thing to do would to comply with their request.

The maximum fine for companies or organisations who are in breach of the Act is 20 million or a percentage of annual turnover, whichever is greater.

This being the case, anyone gathering, processing, and storing personal data would have to be nuts not to comply with a reasonable request to remove that data, I’m my humblest of opinion. No half baked argument based on vague imaginary principles would cut it in a court of law. Today you cannot gather, process, or store personal data for any reason (other than for private domestic use) unless you receive explicit consent from the individual and offer a clear written agreement outlining your your data protection policy with opt out provisioning.

No ifs, no buts, no “you published this 10 years ago and distributed it freely so it’s in the public domain”...that’s not actually a thing legally unless applied to an expired copyright.

The Right of Rectification and Erasure and the Right to be Forgotten is enshrined in the GDPR law. There are a host of arguments covering when it is appropriate to refuse those rights but they are all firmly in the realms of grown up stuff like public health and law enforcement etc.

If the OP can be identified through any data these websites hold on him and they continue to refuse to erase that data then they are in breach of GDPR. if I were them I’d take my big red nose, bow tie, and face paint off, stop honking my horn, and very quickly comply with his request. But then, my ego fits in one small suitcase :D
TT030 10mb/16mb/1Gb, Coco. Falcon 030 Stock 14mb (Lynxman), 1Gb CF. Falcon 030 Stock 14mb (Atari) 170mb IDE. Mega 1 big button (mash up badged Mega 4) 4mb (home cooked RAM upgrade) ICD ADSpeed ST OverScan. Mega 2 big button (4mb), Mega 1 small button (4mb home cooked 72pin SIMM slot), 520 STe (SIPPs), 520 STFM (4mb using a Falcon 4mb board + Blitter).

mikro
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 11:11 am
Location: Kosice, Slovakia
Contact:

Re: Good bye

Postby mikro » Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:05 am

SoundDoctor wrote:Put that same list on your hobby website that recommends local services and it’s a totally different matter. Unless you have full legal consent from each individual and have given them a clear statement explaining how you are safeguarding, managing, and processing their personal data then you are totally on the wrong side of the law.

That sounds very dubious to me. Case in point: Yellow pages (and similar, often user edited, sites).

AnthonyJ
Atari freak
Atari freak
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 8:16 am

Re: Good bye

Postby AnthonyJ » Mon Sep 09, 2019 6:16 am

mikro wrote:
SoundDoctor wrote:Put that same list on your hobby website that recommends local services and it’s a totally different matter. Unless you have full legal consent from each individual and have given them a clear statement explaining how you are safeguarding, managing, and processing their personal data then you are totally on the wrong side of the law.

That sounds very dubious to me. Case in point: Yellow pages (and similar, often user edited, sites).


The key difference there is that this relates specifically to "personal / personally identifiable" data. So a list of company names is not directly personal data, and so not covered by GDPR. A list of people's names is covered. A list of phone numbers, if assigned to individuals rather than companies is also personally identifiable (since you can map from phone number -> person using externally available data).

Note that Yellow pages make very clear on their website that they comply with the right to be forgotten requirement for GDPR, even for data collected from visitors to the website.


Social Media

     

Return to “News & Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests