knank

As said in the forums on Crimsonfire.com by Phillip Burcham Tapware has rejected the sign of the new version of Firestorm, as they said, it's the first time that tapware rejects the sign of a software (correct it if it's wrong), and according to Joyce Morrell, "Tapwave will not be able to sign any GB, GB Color or GBA Emulators for Zodiac." (what about LJZ ????).

Hope they will rectify with this decission.

__________________
The truth is out there.

archangel

Very smart move by Tapwave. Its one thing to have emulators for dead systems like the NES, Genesis etc. That kind of emulation is more about nostalgia than anything else. However, an emulator for a current active system like the GBA is something else entirely. That is mostly about piracy and if I was Tapwave I would want no part of it.

Nintendo has already tried to block Firestorm and will probably continue legal action. Tapwave is better off staying out of it.

If you want to play GBA games go buy one. Save the emulation for the dead systems.

__________________
My Current Gadgets:
16GB iPod Touch, PSP 2000, Nintendo DS Lite

wshwe

Tapwave is being smart. One lawsuit could sink the whole company. These emulators are almost exclusively used with pirated games. Owning the game on the original platform doesn't make it legal either.

__________________
Virtuous

Tam Hanna

Well, but if I were Tapwave, I would release a press release saying just that!
I bet that most users would understand that....

__________________
http://www.palmfilefind.com - find files on your memory card

Visit my blog at http://tamspalm.tamoggemon.com to learn more about the PalmOS platform!
TamsPPC-the PocketPC Blog
TamsS60

CliePet

FWIW/BTW: Longer discussion here:
http://www.emuboards.com/invision/i...showtopic=19834

----
Commentary:

> ...Tapwave is better off staying out of it.
They aren't staying out of it.
Staying out of it would be signing it like any other program, and let the companies *directly involved* fight it out in the courts

They (Tapwave) are siding with Nintendo, or anyone who raises legal uncertainty (AFAIK there is litigation pending/threatened, courts should decide this not the hardware maker!)
----
Additional points: they have signed earlier versions, and other emulators

This is a change in policy (they said they would sign anything).

The current version of LJZ was signed. Don't expect an upgraded version.

A game is getting too popular, and competes with a game sold at Tapwave.com -- hmm, don't let that game be signed anymore. That game promotes a political party the owners of Tapwave doesn't like, don't sign that game...

Slippery slope, subjective censorship is bad.

(nail in coffin)
Tapwave is now censoring otherwise legal games. What more do you need to say ?

ballistic

Censorship? Really? A GBA emulator (and a commercial one at that, LJZ is non-commercial and released under the GPL) isn't a legal gray area? Nintendo has had their sights on Crimson Fire for a while now.

I don't blame Tapwave one bit. They have to protect themselves from a legal quagmire that would likely arise from officially allowing such a commercial GBA emulator on their platform.

If they have decided to change their official position on signing applications that could expose them to legal problems, that's their right and a sound business practice.

They can sign or refuse to sign any developer they want AFAIK; It's their platform (for Tapwave Certified applications) and that is NOT censorship.

Brian

__________________
content is going mobile. visit MobileRead, your source for news and discussion.

CliePet

> They can sign or refuse to sign any developer they want AFAIK; It's their platform (for Tapwave Certified applications) and that is NOT censorship.

A censor - "A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable"

I don't want to debate the meaning of the word 'censor'. I think it applies exactly. (nothing to do with first amendment rights)

They do have a legal right to censor anything they want for their platform specifics. As I mention as an intentionally silly example, they can censor political speech if they wanted to. They can change the rules at the drop of-a-hat, since they are the ones in control.

They can decide to stop signing applications altogether.

If you purchased a Tapwave device with the old rules, they have gone back on their word. Morally wrong IMHO and erodes the trust that they need in their customers when trying to push a new game paradigm.

It is exactly this kind of uncertainty that you don't need.

Tapwave is now censoring otherwise legal games. Could you be next ?

-----
Tapwave 2004-2004 RIP

ballistic

Show me the quote where Tapwave said they'd "sign anything".

Even if they did (which I haven't seen anyone else that claims they said that back it up either), like I said, they can reconsider their position due to possible liability or to avoid litigation, and it makes good business sense. I'd rather have them do that then be sued and potentially spend the $$ to defend themselves, taking money away from moving the platform forward or even force them out of business. They answer to their venture capital investors first and foremost, they're a privately funded startup.

If they are alienating a few chest-thumping users who were never promised the ability to have GBA emulation, or a developer that is in a legal battle with the likes of Nintendo over a legal gray area, I'm sure they have decided that their decision not to sign Firestorm outweighs any possible benefits.

Brian

__________________
content is going mobile. visit MobileRead, your source for news and discussion.

CliePet

[to repeat -- I'm not saying they can't change their position. I'm just pointing out that they did, and IMHO is the kind of FUD the platform doesn't need]

> Show me the quote where Tapwave said they'd "sign anything".

The exact quote is "Tapwave will sign applications that use our proprietary APIs"

http://forums.tapwavedeveloper.com/...s=&threadid=290

Read the first two posts (March of last year), the rest gets into GPL issues (which is a different mess).

ballistic

OK, but is that a non-public, developer-only discussion forum, or is the old developer zone a forum open to the public? Is it a glitch in their BBS software due to the migration to the new developers discussion forums?

I agree to a certain extent there is FUD being spread and they need to clarify their official position.

I don't see the word "all" in that statement, and I certainly don't see "we'll sign anything" as people have been representing.

Brian

__________________
content is going mobile. visit MobileRead, your source for news and discussion.

Tam Hanna

As I said before, tapwave simply cannot fight Nintendo. Even if they would win in the end, their cash would run out before winning! Nintendo will just prolong the lawsuit until the company runs out of $$$.
In additon, firestorm is not all that stable and users except Tapwave certified products to work flawlessly and fast. However, Firestorm does definitely not do Number 2. This would also put blame on the Tapwave name!
Find out more about this at:
http://tamspalm.blogspot.com/2005/0...-certified.html

__________________
http://www.palmfilefind.com - find files on your memory card

Visit my blog at http://tamspalm.tamoggemon.com to learn more about the PalmOS platform!
TamsPPC-the PocketPC Blog
TamsS60

ucfgrad93

I think Tapwave is being very wise to stay out of an area that could potentially lead to very expensive lawsuits.

__________________
Current PDA: Palm T|5

ballistic

It isn't clear what Joyce meant to say in that post, and interpreting "we will unconditionally sign all apps using our proprietary APIs". or "we'll sign anything" is a stretch.

Unless Tapwave signed a contract or entered into an agreement with Crimson Fire promising to sign the app, I don't see how deciding not to sign Firestorm could be construed as going back on their word or breaking any promise.

Brian

__________________
content is going mobile. visit MobileRead, your source for news and discussion.

CliePet

I throw my hands in the air....

> Read the first two posts

The questions was specific for this very scenario. I don't see how it could be any more specific
The open-ended answer led *me* to believe that it wasn't an issue in March of last year. Sure it wasn't a legally binding contract from now till the end of time, but come on...

Too much rationalization and apologies for Tapwave's behavior here if you ask me. If the app being censored were your own (that you were currently legally selling on other Palm platforms) then who knows...

---
> Tapwave certified products to work flawlessly and fast ???
BTW: there are several levels of testing. That's another issue
[AFAIK from what I read it isn't a quality issue, it is what the app does]