Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
1–10 of 102 posts
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#2Pirates is way too heavy a term here. Canonical is large enough and the issue muddy enough that I don't think this is a warranted accusation. They're also shooting themselves in the foot, instead of coming to some kind of amicable arrangement they've now accused canonical of a serious crime which will lead to a response to that accusation rather than to a solution that would have been beneficial to all parties.
If you deal with a company that is much larger than yours that made a mistake or did something you don't agree with publicity is a means of last resort, not your first avenue for redress. And if you truly believe canonical pirated your game then you should sue them.
This is an excellent reminder why I prefer open source to closed source, projects like Arch and Debian would never suffer from this.
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#3Time to lawyer up!
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#4Pirates is way too heavy a term here. Canonical is large enough and the issue muddy enough that I don't think this is a warranted accusation. They're also shooting themselves in the foot, instead of coming to some kind of amicable arrangement they've now accused canonical of a serious crime which will lead to a response to that accusation rather than to a solution that would have been beneficial to all parties. If yo…
??? I'd hardly call "sold someone else's game without permission or royalties for a year" a "mistake".
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#5Pirates is way too heavy a term here. Canonical is large enough and the issue muddy enough that I don't think this is a warranted accusation. They're also shooting themselves in the foot, instead of coming to some kind of amicable arrangement they've now accused canonical of a serious crime which will lead to a response to that accusation rather than to a solution that would have been beneficial to all parties. If yo…
??? I'd hardly call "sold someone else's game without permission or royalties for a year" a "mistake".
seems to be more complex than that, they (Team Meat) wanted SMB in the store but never signed contracts, but canonical put it in the store anyway, so it isn't as if they just saw the game and decided they wanted it... it was a deal being discussed that wasn't completed. Negligent, but not malicious...
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#6Pirates is way too heavy a term here. Canonical is large enough and the issue muddy enough that I don't think this is a warranted accusation. They're also shooting themselves in the foot, instead of coming to some kind of amicable arrangement they've now accused canonical of a serious crime which will lead to a response to that accusation rather than to a solution that would have been beneficial to all parties. If yo…
??? I'd hardly call "sold someone else's game without permission or royalties for a year" a "mistake".
I don't see any proof of that in the article. Again, if that's exactly what happened then they should sue them, this kind of trial-by-media isn't the way to resolve this. Canonical may be in the wrong, they may be not with just one side telling their story it could be just a silly communications issue or it could be that canonical's left hand doesn't now what it's right hand is doing. That isn't unusual at all. I'm pretty sure if they had sent Canonical a C&D they would have received an adequate response.
Of course blog posts are cheaper than lawyers but the end result is that they've now made themselves toxic and no distro will touch them from here.
Keep your dirty laundry out of sight until you've exhausted all other avenues seems to be a good rule of business. Once you go down the name calling road there is no turning back.
Mistakes happen, but this blogpost was not a mistake. The intent here is to inflict damage and it will likely be dealt with accordingly.
edit: and it looks like Canonical already paid.
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
??? I'd hardly call "sold someone else's game without permission or royalties for a year" a "mistake".
seems to be more complex than that, they (Team Meat) wanted SMB in the store but never signed contracts, but canonical put it in the store anyway, so it isn't as if they just saw the game and decided they wanted it... it was a deal being discussed that wasn't completed. Negligent, but not malicious... http://www.formspring.me/EdmundM/q/406960226210700795
If the deal is not done then you DON'T put it in the Ubuntu Store, period
Sign the papers first
Of course, since Canonical did that, they should try an amicable solution.
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#8Please just link directly to the FormSpring rather than the blogified version. It gives all the relevant info.
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#9How does one apply for a job doing PR for canonical?
I'm pretty sure even HN people could do a better job.
Re: Ed McMillen: Ubuntu Store Sold Super Meat Boy Without Permission, Has Yet To Pay
#10Pirates is way too heavy a term here. Canonical is large enough and the issue muddy enough that I don't think this is a warranted accusation. They're also shooting themselves in the foot, instead of coming to some kind of amicable arrangement they've now accused canonical of a serious crime which will lead to a response to that accusation rather than to a solution that would have been beneficial to all parties. If yo…
If they're selling software which they don't have the right to sell, and not sharing the profits with the rightful owner until and unless confronted, that fact should be communicated far and wide. It is a serious breach of ethics if intentional, a show-stopping flaw in Canonical's Software Center system if not, and illegal in any case.