flash968

wow - i think that's the first time i ever saw pete authorize posting of one of his articles

RajDatta

Flash, you better cut some of your crap here. Funny, didn't take you long to say something against Promax.
1st off, Andrew is a sponsor here and John D by no means would let you harrass him.
Secondly, as far as any copyright infringements, please look at forums before you go anywhere else. There is plenty of material that is hosted there that is copyright material. All one would need is a phone call and the site would be down in minutes.
Lets not force people to make such a move since it would hurt the whole community.
Cut this f'ing crap NOW!!
Raj

flash968

huh? i think somebody got up on the wrong side of the bed

i'm not hassling promax at all - i have no intention of doing that - i've had that conversation with john, and it isn't going to happen

i am merely surprised that pete authorized the posting of the article - perhaps it was old enough - it is just the first time i have seen one of their articles let out like that - good news for me, because i missed picking up that issue

John D.

Andrew,

CONGRATULATIONS! Looks like quite the third-party endorsement of your product - and the article says it all..!! Nice going!!

Flash - do I detect a wee bit of animosity that "another" product wasn't selected by the independent reviewer? If that wasn't your intent - it certainly smacks of it...

John D.

flash968

not at all - i've spoken to bob (the author) about the article, even before it was published - he made his choice for his reasons, and i have no issues with it - the promax chip is a good product - i have nothing bad to say about it at all - he didn't do a comparison so there are no "results" to debate - however, his results almost perfectly matched mine, so again, nothing to say there - no problems on this end whatsoever

John D.

I'm sorry - I must have taken a "stupid pill" this morning..?

Unless you were a competing vendor, what "issues" could you possibly have with the choice of an independent author? And those "issues" were so important - they would necessitate a conversation with that author?

BTW - if you ("..good news for me, because i missed picking up that issue...") missed that issue, how would know to call Bob about his article?

Not a flame - you simply appear to have some agenda I'm not aware of...

Huh??? "...before it was published..."?????

John D.

austex

Yeah right Flash, you would never do such a thing to a vendor now would you !!

rpm's S2

Wow. The knives came out quickly today. Let's slow down a bit and carefully look at what Flash asked that seems to have started this little Sharks v. Jets dustup:

That is all he wrote. For those of you who don't get the reference, Flash is refering to Pete Stout, the editor of Excellence magazine. The articles posted by Andrew at Promax are taken from an issue of Excellence published last year, if I recall correctly.

So why all of the violence?

Clearly some people think that Flash has taken a potshot at Promax. These folks believe this is just the latest in a long-running battle over 968 performance chips, dyno results, and a whole bunch of other nonsense that has played out over four web forums and several years (and yes, most of us are just plain sick of it).

All of this drama, however, exists against the backdrop of Flash's actual legitimate question. Does Promax have permission to publish on their company's website copyrighted material belonging to Excellence magazine? I don't know the answer to that, nor has it been addressed.

And don't rush in with the "the internet is a place of freely exchanged information... blah, blah, blah." The Supreme Court and many lower courts have clearly ruled on copyright law and the internet. It applies, period. I spend a large part of my time as a web-based software developer making sure we are not violating copyright law and obtaining and paying for permission to publish copyrighted material. Porsche A.G aggressively goes after copyright issues on the internet all of the time. And yes, losts of people post copyrighted material all of the time. That does not make it right and there is a difference when a for-profit company does it.

Andrew is running a business in the UK (a very nice business that I have been planning to patronize once my 'dampers' are replaced), and business has rules. Copyright rules are quite explicit - even more so in the UK than in the US. Technically, Promax should have permission to post these images of copyrighted material. Do they? I don't know - and neither does anyone else. Perhaps Pete Stout does not care about protecting his copyrighted material. I suspect that is not the case. What would stop anyone from just posting a full pdf of each issue? Excellence relies on its subscription base much more than most publications. Perhaps this is actually good exposure for Excellence? Possibly. But the permission lies with Pete Stout. If Promax does not have permission they may be violating copyright law (I'm no lawyer - my dad hated them too much for me to go to law school. It would have killed him).

You can question Flash's motive for asking the question... as many have. But I believe that he has asked a legitimate question.

Damian in NJ

Ralph, it may be entirely a legimate question-but if he's so concerned about copyrighted information being available on the web maybe he should be thinking about the forums, which hosts tons-and of which he's member #2, with about 5x the post count of any active member? Why come here and raise the question, when he ignores it on the site where he is most active? Does it have to do with who posted the link? Maybe a PM, or flagging the post to the moderator would've been a better way to proceed.

I'm sure John D will know how to handle this.

Oh, and Ralph, this is what you posted on the thread where the forums published the 968 workshop manual.

"Amazing - thanks to all who made this possible."

rpm's S2

Damian,

I was careful not to address Flash's motives for his question and you may have a point about 968Forums. There is a difference though when a incorporated company posts copyrighted material to support its claims. When Ford publishes a positive Car and Driver review of a product you can darn sure bet they get permission.

I do know that John D. will kill this soon.
We are such a disfunctional family.

biotechee

What's the old saying...

You can pick your nose,
you can pick your friends,
you can even sometimes pick you friend's nose (for the record personally never tried this, at least not sober),
but you can't pick your family...

John D.

Here is my $0.0002

First - your summation is largely correct. The UK does belong to two International bodies (as do 168 other countries, at last count) protecting copyright.

However - you have one glaring omission - that being the fact that the article that Andrew reprinted was an editorial regarding his products. Given first hand experience, when Rennlist held the inside front cover placement for my ads ("Rennlist.com") and full page color ads within Excellence, I was granted certain redistribution rights to that particular content.

Now - whether Andrew has those "rights" to the article where his product is highlighted/recommended/analyzed/tested - I do not know. What I do know is that a public post is NOT the place to challenge/ask. And, what I do know is that when something is improperly reprinted on Rennlist from Excellence - I hear about it in short order. Not by "conjecture" of the users/members - but by the organization who holds that copyright. In this case - that would be Excellence. Not Flash. And no - I have heard nothing from Excellence regarding this specific issue. If I do - you can be assured I will ask Andrew to remove his links. For now - those links will stand.

Thirdly - I will have my public questions answered as well. If I learn that someone is associated with a competitive vendor by association, job, commission or referral - without disclosure, they will be banned, especially when they post publicly those same "questions" in another vendors thread. In my view, it's an insidious way to cast aspersions on a company's right to promotion, without casting aspersions on the article itself.

So, I still want to know a) why Flash had a preview to the article "...even before it was published....." - and "how" (being a "disinterested/objective" third-party?); b) understand the inconsistencies he posted (not seeing the issue, but calling the author); and c) what the pretense was for his original post, given that it was sorely "out of place".

My guess is a private e-mail from Flash will suffice.

Have a nice day,

John

flash968

john - i would do this privately, but i suspect that it would not satisfy people who have an axe to grind - i wll contact you privately to discuss this further

to the point of "issues with the decision", i have "issues" with any bad decision somebody makes - that is not the case here, so no, i do not have any "issues with the decision" - you could use the term "contradictory opinion" if you like, but either way, i had nothing to say about the decision one way or the other

no big mystery here - i did not have a preview of the ariticle per se, but i did talk to bob before it was published - he told people on .net that he was writing it - there was a whole thread about it - i had his phone number and called him to talk about it, to see what he was doing and what could be expected from the piece - i generally do that with a half dozen people each day on odd ongoing projects

as far as copywritten material on forums, i am not aware of any magazine articles posted there without the publisher's permission - if there are any, eric sandoval should be contacted - (i think the workshop manual is now public domain and available via free download from porsche)

as for such things here, and the real meat of the matter, i merely expressed surprise - nothing more - no other agenda - this is the first such article i've seen posted here, and the first article from excellence i've seen posted anywhere - i was under the impression that as a rule, this was just not done - i really don't care what promax does, or what they post anymore - it's a dead issue to me - besides, it certainly isn't my place to play cop - that would be up to john d and pete stout

without expressing opinion or making editorial comment, i have no idea whether or not promax has standing on redistribution - if they paid for the review, then they do - if they did not, then they don't without specific permission from the publisher or someone else who has standing

to the point of competitive product, collusion, association or collaboration, like many people here, i am involved in development of a lot of projects with a number of vendors, many of whom are sponsors of mine - it's the nature of the beast in the car game - however, i do not express opinions here on any products or vendors that would be in competition with them - i do sometimes ask questions about something, to learn more about it, but that is the extent of it - the only exception to that has been when i have been misquoted

if there is anything else, i am happy to discuss it privately, but i agree that this is not the place, and we have certainly sidetracked a sponsor's thread long enough

John D.

Until you contact me - you are banned.

I *do not* jump on your forums and represent "sponsors of mine". And no - I absolutely reject out of hand your statement "it's the nature of the beast in the car game". Bull$hit. You and I have an ethical difference in practice and principle.

FYI - I've been at "this game" (your words) a hell'uva a lot longer than you - running a Forum/site with over 50,000 registered on the Forums, over 250,000 site visitors a day - and another 82,000 on my e-mail list, which sends an average of over 10,000,000 redirected messages a day.

Have a nice evening. You can e-mail me at admin@rennlist.com

As for me - you fooled me once with your "9" publication. Shame on me.

Try to fool me twice - shame on you.

John D.

Cervi

Aside of everything that has being said so far and to stay on topic, I'd like to know more about the ProMax chip. Has anyone tried it yet ? Does it have better (or worse) gains than the RS Barn chip ? I mean in real driving, not dyno, as I understand that every vehicle may react different to a certain mod than other. Thanks

EDIT: Nevermind, I didn't realize that they are the same.