pouët.net

Oh I can't even imagine why people aren't storming to your rescue.

why, thats just criminal!

tell me your address and send me a check for travel costs, i can then come to your home to remove all files from your computer.

nosfe got profit!1

Ah, yes, I remember your mails :-)

First of all, sending a cease & desist to an archive to which you personally gave permission to spread your files is kinda stupid. It's not the right way to get people to cooperate.

Still, we cooperated and knos sent you a nice reply telling you that you gave us permission to spread these files and that we only would remove them if you gave us the reason why we should do that. Instead, you threatened us again without telling us why we should remove the files. Once again, not a smart thing to do if you want people to cooperate.

As everyone may know, scene.org is *NOT* a hosting provider, it is intended to be a library and aims to preserve scene history, as in *PERMANENTLY*. We generally don't remove files unless there is a very good reason to do so (f.e. a serious legal reason). You knew that when applying for space, afterall you signed the apply form.

No! Scene.org are criminals! Don't you see?!

i can't believe how criminal scene.org are!! i feel for you tmplog and i hope you die soon.

so he didn't give the reasons right ?

Not to mention that this person actually posted URLs on a message board (presumably to point people to them) to his files hosted on the scene.org servers a couple of months before dropping a threat in the incoming ftp.

Then went beserk when we tried talking with him, asking for more information.

Yeah, go fuck yourself.

Also, he's got a few kettles behind his back, seriously antagonizing people on mailing lists when they became critical of the claims he made in some products he made. (VST plugins, if you want to know)

(He can also be found on mods anthology, on probably other archives such as aminet)

So let me guess... he's signed a record deal granting exclusive distribution rights, but conveniently forgot that in the process of promoting his work to get that record deal in the first place, he already gave permission to this other place here, but rather than taking responsibility for his mistake he's kicking up a hissy fit and calling other people criminals when in fact it was him that signed a fraudulent contract?

...oops.

Just guessing though.

i want to know !

scene.org should but a fine for having files removed, so that anyone getting a record deal would end up paying scene.org something like 10000000 euros and scene would win.

gasman, guardian .. the thing is, we don't know, because he would not tell us.

which are the files then ?

I also want my files back so I can get back to my wood work demos!

if you recognize him as the author of the material he's referring to, then why should he give you any reason for his request?

I tried for over a year to get Crown to remove my unfinished songs and misc old crap from Amiga Music Preservation. finally I gave up bitterly.

eventually I came across to a link to my tunes at AMP in rolling stone's comment section (the timbaland story). not nice.

months passed and one day I noticed I couldn't download some of stargazer's tunes at AMP. they had included a new option; author could now decide what material was downloadable and what's not. problem solved.

Why distribute something you're not happy with?

elsewhere - if that's directed at Tempest, I should say that coma had unwittingly put a load of my unfinished modules on modland - which he courteously removed when I explained the situation and asked him to. And of course *I* didn't release those modules: they were fragments of tunes I'd sent to other people in the past, maybe as collaborative projects that were never realised or status reports on demo soundtracks that never got used, and they somehow trickled out into the wider world. Not my fault, not coma's fault, but it's easy to reach a satisfactory conclusion if everyone's reasonable about it.

As for the original poster, I dunno if this thread title suggests that he's going about this in a tactful and diplomatic way that would encourage people to help him out... But yes, he shouldn't have to give a reason for wanting HIS material removed.

if you have agreed to a contract that you upload files PERMANENTLY to a site, then hell yeah you should have a good reason when asking to take the files down.
if one is not smart enough to read the contracts, then it's his own fault.

Fair enough. I'm under the assumption that if I send an unfinished piece of my work (let it be code or music or whatever) to someone, it simply does not get spread, but maybe I'm just naive :P I certainly don't pass along other people's stuff, unless it's for th explicit purpose of making demos. I also expect this from others.

But to be honest: I do kind of think that you have no moral right to recall something that you've actually released and spread by yourself. I also do understand that it might get you in trouble with a copyright society to have your stuff available somewhere, but that's just because of the backwardness of the copyright society, and should be able to be negotiated anyway.

I've made productions that I'm a bit ashamed of. More than a bit, actually. But I'm not whining and asking that people should remove them or not watch them.

Scene.org is not a public relationship instrument, and rather acts like a library, an archive. It's here to serve the sceners both as creators and spectators.

Let's pick a silly example. Assume that fiver2 gets a fit and does not want to see any of the demos he worked on and won compos here anymore on the net.

Should scene.org comply and remove the files, even though they are part of history now?

This is the reason why we ask for reasons before removing works, and why we try to secure the rights to carry files from that point on.

Blaah.. it all depends on how the material was originally spread. "Release" in the demoscene context means you give up control of how the material is spread (though you keep the IP rights to whatever extent you specify). Typically party organisers go out of their way to make that clear, too, and when you upload to internet archives it should go without saying that the material will be spread.

But that only applies when you're releasing your own material. If you find it available for download somewhere before you've released it yourself, you have every right to insist that it's taken down, both morally and legally. How is that so complicated?

This is wrong (big fail):

- "Hi, I saw my material on your website, and it's not meant to be spread, please take it down ASAP."
- "Why should we?"

This is right:

- "Hi, I released material X a few years back and now I no longer want it spread. Please remove it from your site."
- "Fuck off"

It's not rocket surgery. And frankly the arrogant attitudes of some of these "database sceners" is disgusting. "It's part of history now" is perhaps the lamest excuse I've ever heard for disregarding the wishes of the original authors who did all the hard work in the first place just so you could have a hobby.

command cyborg: indeed, fuck off.