ULTRACADE Discontinued as of 9/01/05

[ChadTower]

My request for royalties was for our licensed characters and games that we have exclusive rights on.

So the MAME artwork emdkay was selling had characters on it that you own or own the rights for?

[davidrfoley]

I've already got the licenses for every table every manufactured by Williams and Bally.  We are working on other manufacturers as well.  Part of my job is Public Relations, and when discussions such as this one start off with the title ULTRACADE DISCONTINUED and rumors of our demise are being tossed around, it's my responsability to put a stop them.  This thread turned into a David Foley / UltraCade bashing sessions egged on by a few individuals.  I have made my points clear. 

As for Pinball Legends, take a sneak peak at http://www.hyperware.com/pub/pl/bk2k.mpg to see the work in progress

[Hoopz]

Part of my job is Public Relations,

LMAO!

[davidrfoley]

Yes Chad, he had marquees and side art with unlicensed characters on it.

[ChadTower]

Yes Chad, he had marquees and side art with unlicensed characters on it.

Let me guess... he didn't have a license for the character M.

 

[Stingray]

Yes Chad, he had marquees and side art with unlicensed characters on it.

Lets not leave out the MAME logo now. Okay sure, he didn't have licensce to preproduce it, that's because none was needed until you interfered.

-S

[ChadTower]

Why can't emdkay sell his MAME logos now?  Who is stopping him?  Foley doesn't own the trademark, the MAME team does.

[Tiger-Heli]

What he had to do was force the MAME team to protect its own property from abuse by third parties.

AFAIK, you cannot legally force someone to protect their own property from abuse by third parties.  IANAL, though.

If you come to me and say "I just heard that someone is going to break into your house and steal your MAME cabinet".  And I reply, "Okay, I don't care, it's basically free to a good home anyway.  I've been keeping it here, but if anyone wants it, they can have it.", that doesn't give you the right to then say "Okay, Tiger-Heli is not going to claim his rights to his arcade machine, so I will tell the police he gave it to me, and then no one can take it away illegally."

Now what you could do is inform the police to be on the lookout, and I think the DA could file charges (burglary - most likely), even if I said I didn't want them too - though they probably wouldn't,  but my example is a criminal case, not a civil case.

I don't think you can go to the DA or the judge and say "Person B is stealing Person A's IP and it is hurting my business, so please make Person B stop, because Person A won't answer my E-mails. . . "

[ChadTower]

That's not a parallel analogy.  He didn't just force them to protect it, he told them that if they didn't protect it he was going to take it.  So, they had to act or lose it.  It wasn't act or you may lose it.  It was act or I'm taking it from you.

If you don't want to protect that cab, and the person says someone may take it, you may not lose that cab.  If I tell you to protect that cab or I'm showing up tomorrow with a handtruck to take it myself, you will probably act.

[Stingray]

If I tell you to protect that cab or I'm showing up tomorrow with a handtruck to take it myself, you will probably act.

The action I would be likely to take would be hiding out in the bushes until you show up so I can put two barrels of Granny Clampett's famous rock salt shot into your backside.

-S

[ChadTower]

Someone did that to me when I was 15.  That really hurts.  It's tons of tiny little wounds with salt in them.

[Stingray]

I know. It's non-lethal, but incredibly painfull. Hillbilly technology at it's finest.

-S

[Tiger-Heli]

That's not a parallel analogy.  He didn't just force them to protect it, he told them that if they didn't protect it he was going to take it.  So, they had to act or lose it.  It wasn't act or you may lose it.  It was act or I'm taking it from you.

If you don't want to protect that cab, and the person says someone may take it, you may not lose that cab.  If I tell you to protect that cab or I'm showing up tomorrow with a handtruck to take it myself, you will probably act.

I think you are finally catching on here, Chad.  Foley is claiming that he forced them to protect their trademark, but he can't do that.  He had no legal way to take it.

To get back to my analogy, I have done nothing to protect the cab, and you say "Act or I am taking it from you".  Since I haven't said that I was giving away the cab, I merely did not indicate I would act to protect it, you don't legally have a right to take it.  Announcing your intent to take it is actually a threatened theft, extortion (if you say that you will take it unless I keep Person B from taking it), etc.  Not that it would be enforced.

You are correct that your action to notify me that you are picking up the cab tomorrow will probably force me to act, but you are missing the point that you are stepping outside of your legal rights in making that assertion.

(And you are now contradicting your earlier arguments and taking the side of the "If it's free and not protected, I'm entitled to it", I might add).

[ChadTower]

You can only do it from within about 15 feet, though. 

[ChadTower]

I think you are finally catching on here, Chad.

[Tiger-Heli]

It's hard to say someone has no legal way to do something that they have already done.  His strategy worked.  He likely based his strategy on the fact that the MAME team is not interested in paying 5 figures in attorney fees to fight the case.

You can't really mean that. . .  I hot-wire a car, drive it to Mexico and no one catches me.   Have I already done it?  Yes.  Did I have a legal way to do so?  No.  Your statement above basically boils down to "It's only illegal if you get caught!"

This case isn't about what is right or legal, it is about who wanted to pay what for attorneys.

To some people it's about what's right or legal, to some people it's about money, to some people it's about rationalizations.

I would only be contradicting my statements if I did these things.  Talking about someone else having done so does not contradict my opinions on MAME users.  I haven't said that what he did is RIGHT, only that it was EFFECTIVE.

Not true.  If you say it is wrong for Person A to steal from Person B, but okay for Person C to steal from Person D, you have contradicted yourself, even though you stole nothing.

More accurately your argument seems to break down to "It is wrong for MAME users to steal IP (rom images), but okay for Foley to steal IP (MAME trademark), b/c not doing so would hurt Foley's business, but not doing so for the MAME user would just inconvenience them."

Technically, you are arguing it from the standpoint that Foley's actions were right, or at least  I took "What he had to do was force the MAME team to protect its own property from abuse by third parties." to mean that you thought this was justified, since you didn't qualify it at all, 
however, technically you did not specifically say you supported his actions, so I might have read too much into that. . .

[ChadTower]

You can't really mean that. . .

[Tiger-Heli]

You're mixing civil and criminal law.  Doesn't work that way.

Fair enough, civil law is basically "Anything is legal until some injured party says it isn't."

Read the text that is there, not the subtext you believe to be there.  If you keep reading, you'll note that I specifically asked Foley if it was right to do.  That may have been in the other Ultracade thread, though.  Are you following both or just this one?

I thought this was the only current one    One is more than enough for me to follow, though. . .

[ChadTower]

I thought this was the only current one

[Stingray]

Stay out, have a life.  It's for your own good.

I tried and I failed. The lesson is:  never try.

-S

[Tiger-Heli]

The other one is even longer, and in Arcade Misc.  Stay out, have a life.  It's for your own good.

Yep, good advice.  I wish I'd followed it 

[Harry Potter]

What I'm really surprised at is Dave claiming in one of the posts here he handles Public Relations for his company.

What I don't get is if he handles PR, wouldn't it have occured to him that there would have been a backlash over the whole MAME tm thing? The right thing to do would have been to inform the MAME community of the progress and his exact intentions, as he talks to the Devs.

But Dave replies: The MAME community does not own MAME, the devs do (For more of this, go to the Mame site forums), therefore I'm not obliged to inform anyone outside the Dev team.

But then [person] says: But Dave, like it or not, MAME has a huge following from end-users to contributors (ie. Mr Goodwraith for buying stuff, Guru for dumping roms, just to name a few, not to mention all the coders contributing). You simply cannot dismiss them like an afterthought because they ain't going anywhere. You are supposed to be in the business of attracting people to your product? Instead the opposite you achieved. Simply put, any of the people mentioned are potential customers. And in turn they'll spread the bad word and so on and so on.

May not be much of a loss to you but it's still a loss and not the greatest PR move.

As for your mission to shut down pirates, while admirable, quite useless. They'll simply find another way to sell their crap and in the end all you've done is tick off a large number of people. Let's hope you won't apply the same techniques to the VPinball.    Good luck. 

[whammoed]

What I'm really surprised at is Dave claiming in one of the posts here he handles Public Relations for his company.

What I don't get is if he handles PR, wouldn't it have occured to him that there would have been a backlash over the whole MAME tm thing? The right thing to do would have been to inform the MAME community of the progress and his exact intentions, as he talks to the Devs.

But Dave replies: The MAME community does not own MAME, the devs do (For more of this, go to the Mame site forums), therefore I'm not obliged to inform anyone outside the Dev team.

But then [person] says: But Dave, like it or not, MAME has a huge following from end-users to contributors (ie. Mr Goodwraith for buying stuff, Guru for dumping roms, just to name a few, not to mention all the coders contributing). You simply cannot dismiss them like an afterthought because they ain't going anywhere. You are supposed to be in the business of attracting people to your product? Instead the opposite you achieved. Simply put, any of the people mentioned are potential customers. And in turn they'll spread the bad word and so on and so on.

May not be much of a loss to you but it's still a loss and not the greatest PR move.

As for your mission to shut down pirates, while admirable, quite useless. They'll simply find another way to sell their crap and in the end all you've done is tick off a large number of people. Let's hope you won't apply the same techniques to the VPinball.

[Goz]

It poses an interesting question: Would you buy a product from someone who so many believe to be morally bankrupt (not financially.... morally)?

Are there any unbiased evaluations of the products like light gun control panels, I/O's, etc...?

-Goz

[elvis]

This thread turned into a David Foley / UltraCade bashing sessions

1) What on earth did you expect in a place like this?  Do you really expect everyone to have a 6-month memory and welcome you back with open arms?  I do honestly wonder exactly how your mind works most of the time.

2) Your grammar really does stink.  From your posts here and my email conversations with you, I recommend you invest some time into your ability to properly convey yourself in a written manner.  That's quite a vital skill for someone in "Public Relations".  It's pretty shocking in this day and age when a business owner can't pen a few words correctly.  But that's not really adding to the thread at all, so tuck it under "friendly offtopic advice".

[Harry Potter]

This thread turned into a David Foley / UltraCade bashing sessions

1) What on earth did you expect in a place like this?  Do you really expect everyone to have a 6-month memory and welcome you back with open arms?  I do honestly wonder exactly how your mind works most of the time.

He figured "If it worked for SNAAAKE, it'll work for me". 

[ChadTower]

Q:  Why would anyone here buy his products?

A:   I don't think anyone has.  We here, and the MAME community, are not his customer base.

[Stingray]

Q:  Why would anyone here buy his products?

A:   I don't think anyone has.  We here, and the MAME community, are not his customer base.

Yes, but he does have that new lightgun controller board coming out soon. As much as I'd love to add a real arcade light gun to my cab, I'm afraid that I just cannot bring myself to do business with Ultracade. So, the answer in my case would be no, I won't buy his products.

-S

[ChadTower]

If it's good, and I ever decide to build myself a MAME cab, and I can afford it, I will buy it.

[quarterback]

If it's good, and I ever decide to build myself a MAME cab, and I can afford it, I will buy it.

First I'll claim that it's mine and try to steal it.
Then I'll try and put anybody who's selling it, out of business.
Then I'll tell everybody that I've done them all a favor by proving that it could have been stolen.

[Crazy Cooter]

But for this to apply, I would have to have said what Foley did is either right or wrong.

[ChadTower]

And no.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

What he did was legally grey at best, and I'm not justifying it, but if you want to take that stance you'd better drop everything you own and live in a cave.

I find this statement more than hypocritical coming from someone as passionate as you are about protecting the stuff they love. (Your family, etc)

I mean, people are going to kill each other, so why buy a gun? People are going to break into houses, so why lock the door? Rapists are going to rape women, so why protect your wife?

Cooter has every right to fight to protect a hobby he loves, and just because Verizon is a shady company, and he *might* use a Verizon cell phone, doesn't mean he can't concentrate his efforts on defending the MAME project. He has more direct knowledge of this hobby than he does of the inner workings of a telcom giant, so it makes perfect sense that he'd spend his efforts opposing those he sees as a threat to that community, rather than going after a phone company. The tobacco industry was brought down by insiders, same with the savings & loan company, etc..This is how things are done on this planet.

Btw, what Foley did wasn't "grey", it was black and white...he tried to muscle out small-time competition and extort money from them in the process. The only reason he had to "work with the community" was because he was so overzealous in his greed, he jumped the gun and started the extortion before he had secured the Trademark.

You say you aren't justifying, but it seems pretty clear you are. Unless you are just arguing for the sake of argument again?


mrC

Edit: spelling

[ChadTower]

I find this statement more than hypocritical coming from someone as passionate as you are about protecting the stuff they love. (Your family, etc)

I do not care what you find or do not find in any statement.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I find this statement more than hypocritical coming from someone as passionate as you are about protecting the stuff they love. (Your family, etc)

I do not care what you find or do not find in any statement.

Of course. Because I'm right and you can't admit that.



mrC

[ChadTower]

 

[Stingray]

It's awfully early in the week for you two to be going at each other like that.

-S

[ChadTower]

I was sitting here, made a statement at Cooter, and he threw stuff at me.  I don't want to talk to him and told him so.
 
Don't send me to the nurse, I'll hold it in today.

[mr.Curmudgeon]

I was sitting here, made a statement at Cooter, and he threw stuff at me.

Making a statement does not amount to "sitting" there. I defended Cooter against a statement you made. A statement you don't even care enough to defend, which makes me wonder why you even make statements like that, at all.

I don't want to talk to him and told him so.

Did you cross your arms and get blue in the face too?   

It's awfully early in the week for you two to be going at each other like that.

lol. Mondays make me cranky.  (EDIT: HA! Looks like I picked the perfect day!)


mrC

[Havok]

Q: