jfh@killer.UUCP (10/23/87)
In article <57@ateng.UUCP>, chip@ateng.UUCP (Chip Salzenberg) writes: > In article <2490@mmintl.UUCP> franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) writes: > > > >I recently posted an article offering to send my Smalltalk/V [TM] decompiler > >to anyone who wanted it. I have since been contacted by Digitalk, who > >threatened to take me to court if I proceeded. > > What pomposity and arrogance! > > I think that I will refrain from buying Digitalk products until they stop > threatening bright, imaginative people with legal action because they are > going to reveal how a widely disseminated product works. > > There is no question of violation of contract here. Mr. Adams simply > examined carefully the program he purchased, and he was about to assist > the great body of Digitalk users by sharing the results of his examination. > How sad that Digitalk wants to restrain their users in this way. > > I think that today's big winner is Softsmarts ... > > -- > Chip Salzenberg "chip@ateng.UUCP" or "{uunet,usfvax2}!ateng!chip" I am a part-time software consultant who actually makes money from the work I do on the side. For this reason, I am very sensitive to claims concerning copyrighted and licensed software. Most of us independent types use the money we make on the side (least ways the ones I know) to buy extra little things. Stealing the work we do robs us of the finer things in life, like getting the car fixed. Someone owns the products in question, in this case Digitalk and their share holders. Producing a product that is illegally produced is stealing money from the owners of the original product. When Chip writes "There is no question of violation of contract here. Mr. Adams simply examined carefully the program he purchased, ..." I wonder how Mr. Adams carefully examined the program. Did he read the documentation? I doubt it. If Digitalk had published the documentation on the output file format, I think they would know better than to threaten suit for someone using that information. Maybe he examined it with a disassembler? Most software is copyrighted. This copyright grants only certain rights to the user, in the case of software, usually only the right to load the program into memory to be executed. Loading a program into memory to be disassembled is not permitted in that case. Even still, many of the licenses I have seen expressly forbid reverse engineering a piece of software by whatever means. So, once again Mr. Adams in all likelyhood had no business with his nose being where it was. Perhaps Digitalk feels Mr. Adams could not have legally produced his work. I would guess that Mr. Adams disagrees, supposing he actually didn't do anything illegal. In that case, it would be a matter for the courts to decide, and not one for us to accuse Digitalk of being wrong. If anyone on this net were to steal from me, I would surely do my best to have their ass. Theft is theft, whether or not a physical object is involved. - John. -- John F. Haugh II HECI Exploration Co. Inc. UUCP: ...!ihnp4!killer!jfh 11910 Greenville Ave, Suite 600 "Don't Have an Oil Well?" Dallas, TX. 75243 " ... Then Buy One!" (214) 231-0993
daveb@geac.UUCP (10/25/87)
In article <1892@killer.UUCP> jfh@killer.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes: | Most software is copyrighted. This copyright grants only certain rights to | the user, in the case of software, usually only the right to load the | program into memory to be executed. Loading a program into memory to be | disassembled is not permitted in that case. Even still, many of the | licenses I have seen expressly forbid reverse engineering a piece of | software by whatever means. So, once again Mr. Adams in all likelyhood | had no business with his nose being where it was. Please! Don't confuse licenses with copyright. I'm confused enough without a statement from Mr. Adams about the details of his situation. -- David Collier-Brown. {mnetor|yetti|utgpu}!geac!daveb Geac Computers International Inc., | Computer Science loses its 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, | memory (if not its mind) CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 | every 6 months.
chip@ateng.UUCP (10/27/87)
Okay, folks, I was wrong... >> In article <2490@mmintl.UUCP> franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) writes: >>>I recently posted an article offering to send my Smalltalk/V [TM] >>>decompiler to anyone who wanted it. I have since been contacted by >>>Digitalk, who threatened to take me to court if I proceeded. In article <57@ateng.UUCP>, I wrote: >> [General anti-lawsuit flamage] >> There is no question of violation of contract here. In article <1892@killer.UUCP> jfh@killer.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes: >[...] Loading a program into memory to be >disassembled is not permitted in that case. Even still, many of the >licenses I have seen expressly forbid reverse engineering a piece of >software by whatever means. True enough; there _is_ a question of violation of contract. I retract my flame. I also wrote: >> I think that today's big winner is Softsmarts ... I still believe this (although I would also include ParcPlace Systems). I don't think that I'm the only programmer who prefers to use Smalltalk systems with _complete_ source code. -- Chip Salzenberg "chip@ateng.UUCP" or "{uunet,usfvax2}!ateng!chip" A.T. Engineering My employer's opinions are not mine, but these are. "Gentlemen, your work today has been outstanding. I intend to recommend you all for promotion -- in whatever fleet we end up serving." - JTK
dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (10/28/87)
In article <1892@killer.UUCP> jfh@killer.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes: >Most software is copyrighted. This copyright grants only certain rights to >the user, in the case of software, usually only the right to load the >program into memory to be executed. Loading a program into memory to be >disassembled is not permitted in that case. I refer you to the case of Vault versus Quaid in which Vault claimed that Quaid had violated copyright law by loading a program into memory with the purpose of disassembling it. I will leave you to guess whether the judge successfully suppressed a giggle as he told Vault its claim had no merit. -- Rahul Dhesi UUCP: <backbones>!{iuvax,pur-ee,uunet}!bsu-cs!dhesi