So you want to be a poser. Again.

Imagine operating a website that got exposed for gamestaging other people's work, hilariously forgetting to remove the author names when claiming it your own work. What would you do?

Apparently you lay low for 5 years and come back for more.
Because he's back at it.

Observe for example this page and notice it is not unlike this page.
It even includes handy compilation references, while no compilations are on the site.

Even better, see how well this page matches this one.
Notice for example the neat "(1)" tag at the end of "Summit Software (1)", while no "Summit Software (2)" is on the site.
Or the TR-DOS flag at the top, while no such files are on the site.

Amazing, isn't it?

So I inquired about the striking resemblance with Senior Vice President and CEO, Paulo.
His answer, of course, is that everything on his site is entirely his own work and it's all just an amazing coincidence. Ah ah ah.
In fact, there is going to be fierce competition from now on. He then cites visitor numbers that would make most sites on the net jealous. Sure, Paulo.
Post edited by mheide on
«134

Comments

  • edited May 2010
    What a wally.

    It's a shame, because there are so many other old 8-bit computers out there that would benefit from a decent archive site... why is he bothering wasting his time duplicating something when he could be creating something new?

    Is he just trying to make some money from the whole enterprise?
  • edited May 2010
    For your amusement:
    copyrights: zx spectrum

    WHAT HAPPENED TO SPECTRUM?
    As everyone knows, Sinclair's ZX Spectrum is over now. It had its time to rule and games for it are not produced anymore. This forced the market to change radically. The 8-bit computers ended and the era of 16-bit started, with brand new games, developers and publishers. Magazines for Spectrum also closed the doors, and others changed their names to still rule the computer's world.
    The fact is that you can no longer buy a Spectrum software, since early 1993! Now, this machine is considered a myth, a classic or whatever. All those who possess one may be considered lucky. Why? Ask them and you'll understand. :)

    SPECTRUM GAMES ARE NOT FREE TO DISTRIBUTE!
    Before, only all those who had a Spectrum were able to play its games. Now everyone can play them, even without a Speccy!
    Actually, emulators of Sinclair's machine are free to be distributed, but games still have their own copyrights and trademarks. This means that Spectrum's software is not allowed to be downloaded, copied, distributed and so on. What you can actually do is play an original cassette, if you have one or, in the other hand, play an allowed-to-be-emulated game.
    Of course no one will play the original games nowadays. Who wants to wait 5-8 minutes for a game to start? Who cares about copyrights? What matters if you are prohibited from copying a game? Yeah, considering that Spectrum do not sell anymore and games for it are also not produced for a pair of years, that kind of thoughts are understandable. However, the problem is deeper than that...

    At the present day, many Spectrum companies no longer exist, some changed their names and many others were acquired by other companies. But the copyrights of the created softwares will still last for many years, probably more than those you'll live! This means that you still can't have but the original software to play.

    Since Gamestage intends to be a legal site, we are still trying to contact all the ZX Spectrum's publishers/developers and individuals, to check the current state of their copyrights. Unfortunately, this is a very hard task. We have sent e-mails to the bigger companies (which currently hold many of the little ones), but not all answers are nice to read. For example, companies like Codemasters, Capcom, Konami and so on, do not allow us to distribute their old Spectrum games, claiming something in trade or say that what we ask is out of question. They probably have their reasons, but what if they don't?
    Fortunately, not all are bad news, since there are some other companies/individuals which allow us to do a free distribution of their software. So, if you cannot download a game from this site, then it means that we don't have legal permission (from the copyrights holder) to do so. We really hope that someday all enterprises will understand our point of view and let us distribute their products with no "buts".

    BEYOND ALL THIS!
    The idea of contacting the copyright holders is to have updated informations about the current status of their software. We want to have a complete and fully working interactive database, where visitors can find exactly what they look for! We want Gamestage to have every single piece of information about ZX Spectrum games, companies, magazines and more, while, at the same time, dive them into a world of nostalgia, childhood memories and excitement.

    WHY SHOULD COMPANIES ALLOW FREE DISTRIBUTION OF THEIR WORKS?
    Not only in our point of view, Spectrum's software should be freely distributed for several good reasons. We have mentioned some for anyone who cares to read them. Take a look:

    1) If people show interest in a certain company's software, then it means they liked it in any way and will probably buy more software from it.

    2) If one day, a certain company does a re-make of an old software, the people who already know and liked it before will surely be the first one to buy it!

    3) Since ZX Spectrum's software were stored in tapes, it constantly tends to grow weak by the minute. Free distribution of old software (which do not sell anymore) is the right way to avoid its loss forever.

    4) Since ZX Spectrum companies will no longer be able to replace original Spectrum cassettes or give any further assistance, how will their once costumers react to a damaged (by time) software? Will the company retrieve them the money? Nah, we don't think they will. It's easier to allow free distribution!

    5) Since Spectrum's market is more than over, free distribution of its old software is a free show of what a certain company did in the past. The point? It's free advertising for current and potential new gamers.

    6) What will companies gain by disallowing a free distribution of their Spectrum software? Nothing! No money, since the company will no longer be able to sell it, and no simpathy from past customers by such attitude. Would you get happy with that yourself?
    http://gamestage.net/index2.html

    a. hasn't he heard of Cronosoft?
    b. what's the point of contacting everyone over the copyright issue? is he trying to get Spectrum software here denied globally? or is he trying to achieve something we're not after?
    c. "who cares about copyrights?" - ha ha.
  • edited May 2010
    heh, he also gives a list of people who gave 'full distribution permission' on all their software? shall we ask these people if it's true, or is this more WoS plagiarism!
  • edited May 2010
    ghbearman wrote: »
    heh, he also gives a list of people who gave 'full distribution permission' on all their software? shall we ask these people if it's true, or is this more WoS plagiarism!

    This is in fact true. He used the email addresses from the permission messages on WoS, to which I naively gave permission at the time. As you can see, he stopped "finding" people as soon as I removed all email addresses.
  • edited May 2010
    ghbearman wrote: »
    heh, he also gives a list of people who gave 'full distribution permission' on all their software? shall we ask these people if it's true, or is this more WoS plagiarism!

    ...and at random, I contacted Simon Brattel. :)

    edit: whoops, sorry, didn't see your message Martijn :(
  • edited May 2010
    Damn, this man is a real pest.

    I remember some of his actions: making Activision to deny their games, copying stuff from WOS and claiming that it is his own, creating multiple nicks and acounts and so on...

    Just when you start to hope that he abandoned Zx Spectrum, he strikes again.

    If he wanted to do something for Spectrum community, there is a lot of job to do. He's from Portugal, we don't have many Portugese software here and he could really preserve some of it.

    But, as I remember he never did anything on his own, not a single preserved game, scanned book, collected info or created game map. Nothing. All the time he only copied others work.
  • edited May 2010
    ghbearman wrote: »
    For your amusement:

    http://gamestage.net/index2.html

    a. hasn't he heard of Cronosoft?
    b. what's the point of contacting everyone over the copyright issue? is he trying to get Spectrum software here denied globally? or is he trying to achieve something we're not after?
    c. "who cares about copyrights?" - ha ha.

    What a boob :lol:

    I love the way 8 bit computers suddenly stopped and 16 bit computers appeared like there was no transition period. I wonder if at a certain time worldwide in early 1993 crack computer agents syncronised the 8 bit stop? :D

    That also makes me think couldn't get any software since early 1993, last Speccy game I bought was in September or October 1993. I wouldn't exactly call that early :D

    I'm kind of worried about what games on tape I have left though, when I finally go home to England, due to the rate of weakening of tape, I'll be lucky if I don't just come back to a box of cassette shells? After all I've been away for over 3 years now....that's a lot of miutes :lol:
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited May 2010
    Gamestage is a right idiot. Shame though, a new Speccy site is good, more the merrier but he messed up from day 1. First with the Activision issue.

    Then stupidly making out they had their own maps and didnt steal them, then of course when it was pointed out that one of their maps had 'Pavero's name on it he suddenly came up with more excuses.

    Now hes back and 'surprise surprise' hes stealing yet more code and making out (despite obvious evidence hes stolen it) that hes the innocent party.

    Its getting quite embarassing from Gamestage, feel sorry for him, he doesnt seem to have a clue

    Plus have you seen the 'awards' ? Just embarassing, half the links dont work, others are just some complete stranger whos made up an award. Seriously Gamestage, its really embarassing to see.
  • edited May 2010
    I thought this was funny:


    1 August 2004
    This is the official day to open Gamestage's doors! Welcome and have fun!

    And yet he has site awards from 2002!
  • edited May 2010
    I've an idea, since the permits are specifically for WOS and no one else, is it too much to go to the people who told us 'yes' and ask them again, for a denial for use by Gamestage, explaining why? Philip K?
  • edited May 2010
    Even more funny, his links section is missing our site. I wonder why :lol:
  • edited May 2010
    When it comes to copyrights, he's both a total fool and a hypocryte.

    Some Gamestage text:
    LEGAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
    Dear visitor, every single work presented to you in this site, such as images, sounds, texts, animations or any other materials, are copyrighted by Spellcraft Entertainment Productions? and / or their respective original creators. The entire site design is also copyright Spellcraft Entertainment Productions? and no part of it can be used elsewhere without permission.
    None of the works presented within this site may be copied, exposed to public audiences, modified, translated to any languages or used elsewhere in any form without an authorisation from the respective copyright holder.

    If you wish use any information(s) or materials presented in this site (images, sounds, texts or other materials), please contact us at gamestage_online@yahoo.com, and let us help you the right way. Gamestage will then analise your situation and give you an answer according to your case.

    He talks everywhere about the copyrights he owns, while it's obvious that he doesn't have copyright to anything, exept his website design (and even in the design he uses these stupid bees that don't belong to him).

    Notice also that he never says "I", always "we", "our organisation" and so on.
    Delusions of grandeur? :)
  • edited May 2010
    mheide wrote: »
    Observe for example this page and notice it is not unlike this page.
    It even includes handy compilation references, while no compilations are on the site.

    I just like the way in that jumbled paragraph explaining which compilations this game appeared on that he didn't even change the order in which WoS lists them.

    It's like when you write an assignment or essay you know that if you're using other peoples sources of info that you jumble it up a bit to look like you're own work. Although in those circumstances it's customary to list the author in some form of bibliography, not claim all the work to be your own, and when found out stubbonly insist that it is even though it's obviously not :D
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited May 2010
    ghbearman wrote: »
    I've an idea, since the permits are specifically for WOS and no one else, is it too much to go to the people who told us 'yes' and ask them again, for a denial for use by Gamestage, explaining why? Philip K?

    That would go against the whole purpose of the permissions project! We don't look for exclusive permissions, we just want to check with the copyright holders whether WoS can be allowed distribution. Nothing more, nothing less.
  • edited May 2010
    bloomin eck, wot a swizz!!!
  • edited May 2010
    I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for this.
    ghbearman wrote: »
    b. what's the point of contacting everyone over the copyright issue?

    Hypothetically, what would you suggest someone do if they did want to set up a "competitor" site to WoS?
    Ralf wrote:
    I remember some of his actions: making Activision to deny their games

    Could you point me to the evidence that Paulo's actions made Activision change their position on Spectrum game distribution? As far as I remember, all Paulo did was to manage to get a contact within Activision, which Martijn hadn't managed to do.
    psj3809 wrote: »
    he messed up from day 1. First with the Activision issue.

    Same question to you as well, and doubly so as moderators should be held to higher standards than others.
    ghbearman wrote: »
    I've an idea, since the permits are specifically for WOS and no one else, is it too much to go to the people who told us 'yes' and ask them again, for a denial for use by Gamestage, explaining why?

    Because they probably wouldn't appreciate being dragged into a fight which isn't their business or their problem?
  • edited May 2010
    Thanks Martijn & Philip, I suppose I'm just brainstorming. (it appears to be just rain at the moment, with no lightning.) And Philip, I don't know.

    if gamestage wants competition, I wonder who this is:

    www.gamestage.pt
  • edited May 2010
    Could you point me to the evidence that Paulo's actions made Activision change their position on Spectrum game distribution? As far as I remember, all Paulo did was to manage to get a contact within Activision, which Martijn hadn't managed to do.

    Ok, although I can't bother to read these old threads now, I must admit that you are probably right, Philip. At least partially.

    If remember correctly, Activision, when asked about copyrights, spotted a chance to earn some extra bucks and they offered WOS to host their games for a fee of several thousand dollars. Which was refused.

    But:

    1)
    We don't know exact correspondence between Gamestage and Activision,
    Was he polite or rude? We can only guess by his other posts :)

    2)
    If you feel like a part of Spectrum community, you shouldn't do such things on your own, without asking anybody. There are people experienced in getting permissions. For me it seems that he was acting like a bull in a china shop, asking random persons about permissions.


    And now I'll be controversial:

    I feel that sending permission requests to some general client contact email of big companies will never give you permissions, only denials.

    You will never reach the big bosses who have right to decide anything.

    You will be probably answered by some low level clerk from marketing department, who isn't allowed to make decisions on his own. But just to be safe, he'll answer "NO".

    He probably won't even know what Zx Spectrum is, but he won't risk to ask his mananger if he should allow some "warez site" to host their licensed software.

    So this isn't the proper way of getting permission, because you can only fail. What Gamestage did.
  • edited May 2010
    A lot of Gamestages letters/emails came across as really rude and sounded more like he was after exclusive copyright for himself. I always wonder if he meant it to come across like this, he could've wrote the most polite diplomatic letter ever in his native Portugese, but the inelegance of Babelfish made him sound like some kind of maniac in English.

    No wonder deniences were made.
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited May 2010
    Ralf wrote: »
    We don't know exact correspondence between Gamestage and Activision,
    Was he polite or rude? We can only guess by his other posts :)

    You have not seen the correspondence. Others have done (in particular Activision's response), and it's got prettty much exactly the same content as the refusal sent to WoS.
    If you feel like a part of Spectrum community, you shouldn't do such things on your own, without asking anybody. There are people experienced in getting permissions. For me it seems that he was acting like a bull in a china shop, asking random persons about permissions.

    I don't see you criticising Bruno for contacting random people at Timex, so this seems a strange position to be taking. Or is it actually that you don't like the response Paulo got, so you're shooting the messenger?
    I feel that sending permission requests to some general client contact email of big companies will never give you permissions, only denials.

    That's exactly what Martin does.
    You will be probably answered by some low level clerk from marketing department, who isn't allowed to make decisions on his own. But just to be safe, he'll answer "NO".

    In no reasonably large company will any low-level customer-facing clerk be able to answer questions about IP. They'll go straight to the legal department.
    So this isn't the proper way of getting permission, because you can only fail. What Gamestage did.

    A nice story, apart from the fact that the denial from Activision came from Jon Estanislao, who a very quick check on LinkedIn will tell you was "Senior Manager, Business Development & Emerging Platforms" 5 years ago when all this happened. I wouldn't call that a "low-level customer-facing clerk". That information is all in the public domain, but yet you didn't spend 5 minutes checking it. Why not?
  • edited May 2010
    I agree, when writing in a foreign language, you always seem to be more rude and harsh.

    You just don't know all this round sentences and courtesy idioms. You put your ideas in straightforward, simple way which is good when talking about technology for example, but completely fails when you need to use some diplomacy.
  • edited May 2010
    No wonder deniences were made.

    Do you have any evidence Paulo's actions changed Activision's position at all? It's not like we previously had a message from Activision saying "yes, please distribute these" and then it changed: all Paulo did was to manage to make contact with someone at Activision who was prepared to state their position.

    While people here may not like it, that's something he should be thanked for, not criticised for. (The rest of his stuff, on the other hand, is an entirely different question).
  • edited May 2010
    Do you have any evidence Paulo's actions changed Activision's position at all?

    No, and I seriously doubt anybody else could provide any either.

    I wasn't implying that a letter written cleverly in perfect Queens English would sway the overall decision on distribution. Only that when you get an email from somebody randomly that appears to be demanding the copyrights to your back catalogue you're obviously not going to say "Oh yes, here they are" and hand them over.
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited May 2010
    Only that when you get an email from somebody randomly that appears to be demanding the copyrights to your back catalogue you're obviously not going to say "Oh yes, here they are" and hand them over.

    True.

    But the e-mail Martijn sent definitely wasn't asking for copyright to be handed over, and that received (pretty much) exactly the same response, so I really don't see why Paulo's being criticised over this. It's pretty obvious he didn't actually cause any damage.
  • edited May 2010
    True.

    But the e-mail Martijn sent definitely wasn't asking for copyright to be handed over, and that received (pretty much) exactly the same response, so I really don't see why Paulo's being criticised over this. It's pretty obvious he didn't actually cause any damage.

    Well that's fair enough.

    Maybe criticising him personally for the deniences may not be the best idea, as with an industry giant like Activision regardless of the content of the emails they were never going to just say yes, not without some kind of contract or cash exchange. Especially since a lot of the back catalogue although not exclusively Speccy is still being sold now on those little portable machines you plug into the TV, and retro packs available for current or previous Generation games consoles.

    But I suppose at the end of the day regardless of who's email got there first it was still worth a try?

    But one thing's for certain I won't defend Gamestages other questionable activities that's for sure ;)
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited May 2010
    Dear WoSsers, one and all.

    I find this thread to be out of line. It is in direct violation of the Forum Guidelines. The "tone and content" of the original poster is borderline disrespectful and impolite. It is in no way upbuilding nor encouraging.

    The "offending party" is not here to reply to what is being said behind their back. No matter what the past history of the person/website in question, we should hold ourselves as a Speccy community to a higher standard than what is here being put on display. A personal disagreement, such as the one ongoing between Original Poster and "offending party" in question, ought to remain between the two, in private and not used as, what is tantamount to, a personal attack.

    I may be reading the forum guidelines with my Spectacles of Strictness on but "one rule to govern them all" means one WoSser and all WoSsers fall under the guidelines. It does not matter how much I agree or disagree with what has been stated in this thread, by not only Original Poster or others, this thread is one of Action, Unbecoming Of A WoSser.

    I am giving Mr. WoS Himself a chance to reply to what I have hereby brought to His attention. This means that within 24hours this thread may be closed if no answer is forthcoming ... and if I will still have that power then, I will exercise it.

    We should all let politeness guide our conscience.

    Happy vibes and hugs all around,
    -ZnorXman, Proud to be a WoSser.

    PS I have a headcold, I hope this post makes sense.
  • edited May 2010
    You can lock threads... we can also unlock them :)
    My test signature
  • edited May 2010
    fogartylee wrote: »
    You can lock threads... we can also unlock them :)

    I know :razz:

    My main concern is that no matter what the validity of the original message, it could have been worded differently, more diplomatically.
  • edited May 2010
    ZnorXman wrote: »
    I find this thread to be out of line. It is in direct violation of the Forum Guidelines. The "tone and content" of the original poster is borderline disrespectful and impolite. It is in no way upbuilding nor encouraging.
    How would you feel if someone was stealing from your website and passing off all your hard work as their own.
    The "offending party" is not here to reply to what is being said behind their back.
    Behind his back???

    If you go back to Martijn's original post you'll see he has already challenged him about it.
    No matter what the past history of the person/website in question, we should hold ourselves as a Speccy community to a higher standard than what is here being put on display. A personal disagreement, such as the one ongoing between Original Poster and "offending party" in question, ought to remain between the two, in private and not used as, what is tantamount to, a personal attack.

    I may be reading the forum guidelines with my Spectacles of Strictness on but "one rule to govern them all" means one WoSser and all WoSsers fall under the guidelines. It does not matter how much I agree or disagree with what has been stated in this thread, by not only Original Poster or others, this thread is one of Action, Unbecoming Of A WoSser.

    I am giving Mr. WoS Himself a chance to reply to what I have hereby brought to His attention. This means that within 24hours this thread may be closed if no answer is forthcoming ... and if I will still have that power then, I will exercise it.

    We should all let politeness guide our conscience.

    Happy vibes and hugs all around,
    -ZnorXman, Proud to be a WoSser.
    Martijn has every right to bring it to all WoS members attention if he wishes to, as stated earlier it's Martijn hard work being plagurised.

    Remove your head from airy-fairy land and live in the real world for a change. The permissions issue can be explained (and very well done so by Phil) but the rest is unforgiveable.

    And you guys wonder why I left the WoS forums...
    I wanna tell you a story 'bout a woman I know...
  • edited May 2010
    Dear ZnorXman,

    I understand what you say, and the thread has not been posted lightly.
    Paulo is ripping off not just WoS, but everyone in the Spectrum scene. The stated examples in the thread starter are just that, examples. He also still has TZX files on his site that were created by the TZX Vault team, for example, even though he was requested to remove their work years ago.

    As you can see from the setup of his site, further plagiarisms are planned for the future, such as cassette inlays, maps and other files that he never contributed to.

    As such, and after a considerable number of mail exchanges with Paulo over the past week, I decided to expose him to help "let him find the time" to remove the plagiarised material. I promised him I'd do this if the material was still there by the end of Saturday (yesterday) and I always keep my promise if at all possible.

    Indeed you have the privilege to lock the thread as a moderator, and I will not stand between it, but I felt it absolutely necessary to warn everyone out there that this is going on.

    I hope you understand the reasoning behind it.
Sign In or Register to comment.