From @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Fri Aug  7 04:12:08 2009
Received: from isp.becroft.co.nz (isp [127.0.0.1])
	by isp.becroft.co.nz (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n76GC0Qn032642
	for <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@>; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:12:00 +1200
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by isp.becroft.co.nz (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n76GBxwN032641
	for notator-list; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:11:59 +1200
X-Authentication-Warning: isp.becroft.co.nz: majordomo set sender to @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ using -f
Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.65])
	by isp.becroft.co.nz (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n76GBncG032583
	for <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@>; Fri, 7 Aug 2009 04:11:50 +1200
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
  b=iDFo5/63rv02bHPMTuab0BalP/ZFU95xtZlsPIPvsgrVMU2jwqIU3dN2OKwGkZSH;
  h=Received:Message-Id:From:To:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:References:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [65.185.151.113] (helo=cpe-65-185-151-113.woh.res.rr.com)
	by elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.67)
	(envelope-from <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@>)
	id 1MZ5Z8-0001Oo-IV
	for @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@; Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:11:42 -0400
Message-Id: <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@>
From: Dave Post <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@>
To: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
In-Reply-To: <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Subject: Re: [NSL] Re: Gerhard Lengeling
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 12:11:39 -0400
References: <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@> <@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
X-ELNK-Trace: 045735fd137b16681aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec797d2e26fcacd17f2429007341b71fdd81350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 65.185.151.113
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	version=3.2.5
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on isp.becroft.co.nz
Sender: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
X-URL: http://www.notator.org

 [Notator/Creator SL mailing list]

On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Notator-owner wrote:

> "What's next?" you asked.
> Well, I our main objective is still to get Notator released dongle- 
> free, so to make it more stable and error free for us all.
> I would guess that Mr. Lengeling won't see Notator as a threat to  
> the currently sold Logic, but only he can answer that question.
> We've been discussing other things in the past as well (getting the  
> Notator code released as freeware, thereby making it possible for  
> different programmers to improve on it and/or the owners themselves  
> improving it etc., but one thing at a time).

Given that he hasn't responded yet to my inquiry about the manual's  
copyright, I see no reason at this point to expect he'd be helpful  
with more difficult issues. Let's not read too much into his email to  
Vic. He sent a pleasant, brief reply -- nothing more. If VIc wants to  
follow up, it might be best to focus on the manual, for now.

It seems to me that releasing Notator dongle-free and releasing the  
source code are closely related matters. Apple might release the  
source, but it would then be up to others to remove the dongle-related  
code.

I also believe that releasing the source would be more problematic  
from Apple's perspective than it might first appear. Presently,  
Notator is a program for a long-defunct platform. Releasing the source  
would open the door to compiling new, free versions that run under  
OSX, Windows, and Linux. If the open-source community started making  
improvements, it would become ever more competitive with Logic.  
Furthermore, Logic may include sections of Notator code, so releasing  
the Notator source could present legal problems related to Logic's  
copyright protection. If I represented Apple on this matter, I'd  
require an audit of the code and ask how Apple would benefit from  
incurring that expense.

Finally, I doubt Lengeling has sole authority to release the source or  
grant copyright releases for the manual or software (and note that  
having the source but not a copyright release would be useless, if we  
want to stay legal). Those acts would amount to giving away property  
that belongs to Apple's shareholders. He could be influential --  
probably even essential -- but surely other high-ranking Apple people  
would have to agree.

Dave


 UNSUBSCRIBE?
 Send an email to:   @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
 with the command:   UNSUBSCRIBE NOTATOR your@email
 (replace "your@email" with your own email address