Getting things the wrong way round . . .

Björnke von Gierke bvg at
Sat Apr 19 16:32:09 CDT 2008

I think I understand Lynn's response in this. To his mind everything  
is great. His new service/company/whatever gets cool publicity, can  
piggyback on an existing brand, and it's even legal. To him there's no  
dilution of anything, just additions to his stick.

Personally, normally I do hear of publisher vs creator issues only  
from the gaming and music industry. Based on that I'm quite worried  
about this. When I see "Paramounts best artist special edition", or  
"Vivendi puzzle game collection" I seldom get the impression that  
these "best artists" and puzzle coders where very successful in their  
respective businesses.

Because of that, I'm not really interested in Lynn's take on re- 
branding Rev to Myrrh Rev (only in selected markets, as long as  
supplies last). What I really am interested in, is:

Why does RunRev agree to be the mount in this deal? Normally  
publishers who omit names or change the product of a programmer do pay  
him/her to create work for them, did Lynn pay RunRev anything? Why is  
it always only Lynn who reacts to any PR related issue? Who is  
responsible for public relation and advertising strategy at RunRev?  
Who is responsible for any communication strategy at RunRev?

Obviously most of these question will never be answered, because  
that's not how RunRev does it's business. Too bad.

have fun


official ChatRev page:

Chat with other RunRev developers:
go stack URL ""

More information about the use-livecode mailing list