nelson@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (09/26/90)
Xircom has been distributing a packet driver while violating the copyright on it. I wrote the skeleton of the Clarkson packet drivers, which is copyrighted under the GNU General Public License. This copyright requires that code which is linked with mine be available in source form. I allowed them to require a signed nondisclosure form, provided that source code be given to anyone willing to sign. They have violated that copyright and agreement by refusing to distribute the source code, have agreed that they are violating it, and have ceased distribution of the packet driver. This means that Xircom Ethernet adapters no longer come with a packet driver. If your application requires a packet driver, you will be unable to use a Xircom adapter. I am asking anyone who was considering the purchase of a Xircom adapter to purchase a D-Link adapter instead, and tell Xircom why you did not buy their product. No, I don't have D-Link's address. Perhaps some kind soul who reads this will supply it to me. There is also another company (whose name I do not recall) that makes pocket Ethernet adapters. -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667 It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dyson
chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman) (09/28/90)
D-Link Systems Inc.
5 Musick
Irvine CA 92718
714-455-1688 according to the 1990-91 LAN Times Buyers Guide
Also with offices in Canada and the U.K.
Is there a packet driver for their products?
-- Gary Chapman, New York University
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: tihor@acf4.NYU.EDU (Stephen Tihor)
Date: 26 Sep 90 15:06 EDT
Date-Received: 26 Sep 90 15:06 EDT
Subject: Re: VAX ftp programs ...
Message-ID: <3930059@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!tihor
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
References: <2E2EE1238E3F0027AB@UPR1.UPR.CUN.EDU>
Define Inteligent. Give two examples.
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman)
Date: 27 Sep 90 23:53 EDT
Date-Received: 27 Sep 90 23:53 EDT
Subject: Re: TCP/IP with DEPCA card
Message-ID: <16740021@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!chapman
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
References: <86851@aerospace.AERO.ORG>
I thought I read somewhere that DEC was phasing out their DEPCA and
replacing it by another board. Anyone know? - Gary Chapman, NYU
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman)
Date: 27 Sep 90 23:58 EDT
Date-Received: 27 Sep 90 23:58 EDT
Subject: Re: NetWare + NCSA TCP/IP (or CUTCP) without using ECONFIGed NET$OS
Message-ID: <16740022@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!chapman
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
References: <862@usage.csd.unsw.oz.au>
With regard to 802.3 vs DIX, it is my understanding that very few
machines actually speak 802.3, but that this will become increasingly
common as time passes. The issue is whether arbitrary 802.3 devices
will uniformly cope well with Novell's incorrect 802.3. If is for
fear of potential incompatibility problems that we are using DIX
exclusively with Novell here.
Comments?
- Gary Chapman, NYU
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman)
Date: 28 Sep 90 17:57 EDT
Date-Received: 28 Sep 90 17:57 EDT
Subject: Re: Telnet/FTP driver for WD8013EBT (WD Plus16)
Message-ID: <16740023@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!chapman
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
References: <12728@accuvax.nwu.edu>
I have a WD EtherCard PLUS 16 in a Compaq 386/20. No problems or special
configuration required using standard Clarkson-distributed packet drivers.
- Gary Chapman, chapman@nyu.edu
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman)
Date: 28 Sep 90 17:17 EDT
Date-Received: 28 Sep 90 17:17 EDT
Subject: IIc <-> Mac
Message-ID: <7070001@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!chapman
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
For a person with and Apple IIc at home and a Mac Plus at work, several
questions:
(1) The IIc has Appleworks software. Is there alternative software, especially
for word processing, which would be more 'mac-like' than Appleworks?
Can a mouse be used with Appleworks, or with this other hypothetical
software?
(2) Is it possible to transfer files back and forth between Microsoft Word
on the Mac Plus and Appleworks on the IIc? What software/hardware might
be required to facilitate this.
Many thanks for any info. - Gary Chapman, NYU, chapman@nyu.edu
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman)
Date: 28 Sep 90 17:20 EDT
Date-Received: 28 Sep 90 17:20 EDT
Subject: IIc <-> mac
Message-ID: <140001@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!chapman
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
For a person with and Apple IIc at home and a Mac Plus at work, several
questions:
(1) The IIc has Appleworks software. Is there alternative software, especially
for word processing, which would be more 'mac-like' than Appleworks?
Can a mouse be used with Appleworks, or with this other hypothetical
software?
(2) Is it possible to transfer files back and forth between Microsoft Word
on the Mac Plus and Appleworks on the IIc? What software/hardware might
be required to facilitate this.
Many thanks for any info. - Gary Chapman, NYU, chapman@nyu.edu
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: hind@acf2.NYU.EDU (Michael Hind)
Date: 28 Sep 90 13:05 EDT
Date-Received: 28 Sep 90 13:05 EDT
Subject: Beginner's Bridge Class in NYC
Message-ID: <7490001@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!acf2!hind
Newsgroups: nyu.general
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6 9/18/89; site acf2.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
IMPRECISION BRIDGE CLUB
If you would like to learn how to play bridge, the Imprecision Bridge
Club is sponsoring a beginner's class. The class will be for those
who have never played before, but players relatively new to the game
are encouraged to enroll.
Day: Tuesdays
Time: 7:00 -- 9:00
Place: Room 909, Loeb Student Center
The class will start in October and continue for ten weeks. Each week
a lecture will be given by an experienced tournament player; this will
be followed by a supervised play period. The fee for the entire ten
week class is only $25 and includes the text book that will be used.
For more information contact:
Mike or Ernie
(212) 998-3481
or send computer mail to:
hind@acf2.nyu.edu
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: hind@acf2.NYU.EDU (Michael Hind)
Date: 28 Sep 90 13:08 EDT
Date-Received: 28 Sep 90 13:08 EDT
Subject: Beginner's Bridge Class in NYC
Message-ID: <13690001@acf2.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!acf2!hind
Newsgroups: rec.games.bridge
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6 9/18/89; site acf2.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
IMPRECISION BRIDGE CLUB
If you would like to learn how to play bridge, the Imprecision Bridge
Club is sponsoring a beginner's class. The class will be for those
who have never played before, but players relatively new to the game
are encouraged to enroll.
Day: Tuesdays
Time: 7:00 -- 9:00
Place: Room 909, Loeb Student Center, New York University
The class will start in October and continue for ten weeks. Each week
a lecture will be given by an experienced tournament player; this will
be followed by a supervised play period. The fee for the entire ten
week class is only $25 and includes the text book that will be used.
For more information contact:
Mike or Ernie
(212) 998-3481
or send computer mail to:
hind@acf2.nyu.edu
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: bako@acf4.NYU.EDU (jOhN bAkO)
Date: 20 Sep 90 20:04 EDT
Date-Received: 20 Sep 90 20:04 EDT
Subject: Re: A new body for my Canon FD lenses
Message-ID: <15300008@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!bako
Newsgroups: rec.photo
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
References: <2144@bnlux0.bnl.gov>
How about the Canon T90. Spot/Center/Average metering modes. Lots of
automatic exposure modes.
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: moy@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gloria Moy)
Date: 26 Sep 90 17:42 EDT
Date-Received: 26 Sep 90 17:42 EDT
Subject: Re: Basketball cards and Jazz news
Message-ID: <3510003@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!moy
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
References: <2122@esunix.UUCP>
I haven't collected basketball cards since I was a kid. I do have a Bill Bradley
basketball card.
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: rosenblg@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary J. Rosenblum)
Date: 27 Nov 89 12:11 EST
Date-Received: 27 Nov 89 12:11 EST
Subject: Testing parsing routine
Message-ID: <21540003@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!rosenblg
Newsgroups: to.cmcl2
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6 9/18/89; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
This is just to test the network address parsing routines
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: rosenblg@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary J. Rosenblum)
Date: 20 Mar 90 15:18 EST
Date-Received: 20 Mar 90 15:18 EST
Subject: test
Message-ID: <21540004@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!rosenblg
Newsgroups: to.cmcl2
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6 9/18/89; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
testing
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: rosenblg@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary J. Rosenblum)
Date: 17 Jul 90 02:14 EDT
Date-Received: 17 Jul 90 02:14 EDT
Subject: testing from notes
Message-ID: <21540005@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!rosenblg
Newsgroups: to.cmcl2
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6 9/18/89; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
test me for the last time in notes
Relay-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6.1 1/11/90; site acf4.NYU.EDU
From: rosenblg@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary J. Rosenblum)
Date: 18 Jul 90 14:58 EDT
Date-Received: 18 Jul 90 14:58 EDT
Subject: woof woof
Message-ID: <21540006@acf4.NYU.EDU>
Path: acf4!rosenblg
Newsgroups: to.cmcl2
Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.6 9/18/89; site acf4.NYU.EDU
Organization: New York University
barf bagkirkd@clubisc.ism.isc.com (Kirk Davis) (09/29/90)
I'm posting this for Xircom since they have no net access. I'd like to comment on my own, but I feel it would be inappropriate since I'm bias (I'm working with them and found them to quite reasonable). So please, no email... (see the number below) --- We at Xircom regret any confusion and inconvenience we may have caused regarding our support for the Packet Driver interface. But, due to the proprietary nature of the internal operation of our products, we feel it would not be prudent to freely distribute the source of our drivers. Understanding Mr. Nelson's concern, Xircom will be discontinuing the shipment of the Packet Driver based on the Clarkson Packet driver and will be replacing it with a fully compliant Packet Driver developed independently. Please note that Xircom is committed to the TCP/IP community and is supported on over 15 different TCP/IP products, only some of which are based on the Packet Driver. In a product comparison review in the August 27th. issue of PC Week, Xircom was shown to be the fastest (and received the highest OVERALL rating) of the external LAN adapters. Please contact Mr. Steven R. Magidson at Xircom for additional information. (818) 884-8755 phone; (818) 884-1719.
nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (09/29/90)
In article <1990Sep28.192413.21255@ism.isc.com> kirkd@clubisc.ism.isc.com (Kirk Davis) writes:
We at Xircom regret any confusion and inconvenience we
may have caused regarding our support for the Packet
Driver interface. But, due to the proprietary nature
of the internal operation of our products, we feel it
would not be prudent to freely distribute the source of
our drivers.
Prudent or not, you agreed to do so, yet you have not. That makes you
liars. I suggest to dear gentle readers that they keep that in mind.
Understanding Mr. Nelson's concern, Xircom will be
discontinuing the shipment of the Packet Driver based
on the Clarkson Packet driver and will be replacing it
with a fully compliant Packet Driver developed
independently.
"Concern"? "CONCERN"? You fardling stole my software, that's what you
did. For a year you distributed it in violation of my copyright[1]. I've
gone beyond concern -- I'm right pissed! And being a developer of free
software, I don't have money to pay a lawyer to sue your ass off [2].
You can bet your bippy I'm going to go over your "independently developed"
packet driver with a fine-toothed comb.
There are two morals to this story for other developers of free
software: Register your copyright so you can sue for damages, and
don't compromise free software.
[1] You don't have to take my word for it. Look at their Clarkson-
derived driver and you'll see my copyright, which points you to the
file called COPYING, which gives the terms for copying. One of the
terms is that all the source for an executable that includes my code
must be available. As a *concession* to Xircom's concerns, I allowed
them to require a nondisclosure agreement before providing source
to anyone requesting it. They won't do it, even though they said
they would.
[2] I have also been advised that, lacking copyright registration, all
that I could accomplish is to force you to stop distributing the driver,
which you have already agreed to do.
--
--russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667
It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dysonfaatzd@turing.cs.rpi.edu (Don Faatz) (09/29/90)
As a community that benefits greatly from the efforts of people like Russ Nelson - we should STRONGLY support his position. If vendors who collect money for their products are encouraged to behave badly and basically absorb copyrighted freeware without regards for the copyright owner - we shall all suffer as the freeware pool goes dry. I, for one, shall not buy products from Xircom now or in the future. < <Don Faatz, Rensselaer CSLab faatzd@cs.rpi.edu, Troy, NY <
jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu (Jay Maynard) (09/29/90)
I think Russ is right on the money with this one. While I think the GNU Public Virus...er...license amounts to software theft and should be boycotted itself, the proper course for Xircom would have been to not use the code at all if they were unhappy with the terms of the license. I ceased work on a Clarkson-derived packet driver because of the GPV, and Xircom should have done the same. I won't buy anything from them either. -- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity. "It's a hardware bug!" "It's a +--------------------------------------- software bug!" "It's two...two...two bugs in one!" - _Engineer's Rap_
dls@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (David L Stevens) (09/29/90)
In article <5DN%9T*@rpi.edu>, faatzd@turing.cs.rpi.edu (Don Faatz) writes: > As a community that benefits greatly from the efforts of people like > Russ Nelson - we should STRONGLY support his position. Break out the ropes! There's gonna be a lynchin', Festus! Your sense of moral outrage is touching, but whether I support his position or not will have to do with the merits of his position, thank you. From what I've seen, and from what I know about people, I doubt that there was any conspiracy to steal anything. More likely is that they didn't even read the conditions applied to it and when the knowledge of their mistaken violation finally made it to the right people, they acted honestly and complied with the copyright. I don't know the facts, and I doubt that you do either, but assuming some good faith on both parts, that's what I expect happened. What seems to have you so upset is that they comply with the copyright in the way you wanted. Well, big deal-- if they don't want to make *their* sources available, they don't have to, and even in the eyes of a Free Software zealot, that makes them no worse than every other company that does the same thing. They didn't transfer ownership of Xircom to you, so why are you acting like you have some right in deciding whether or not they distribute their sources? Boycotting Xircom because Russ Nelson and Don Faatz weren't able to impose their will on the people running Xircom isn't my idea of a worthy cause. I can see where Mr. Nelson might be frustrated, and I'm sure he'll make every effort to clarify the copyright conditions up front in the future, but that's where it ends for me. -- +-DLS (dls@mentor.cc.purdue.edu)
nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (09/29/90)
In article <12920048@acf4.NYU.EDU> chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman) writes:
D-Link Systems Inc.
5 Musick
Irvine CA 92718
714-455-1688 according to the 1990-91 LAN Times Buyers Guide
Also with offices in Canada and the U.K.
Is there a packet driver for their products?
Yes, D-Link has their own packet driver, not a Clarkson-derived one.
--
--russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667
It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dysonnelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (09/30/90)
In article <14568@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> dls@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (David L Stevens) writes:
From what I've seen, and from what I know about people, I
doubt that there was any conspiracy to steal anything. More likely
is that they didn't even read the conditions applied to it and when
the knowledge of their mistaken violation finally made it to the
right people, they acted honestly and complied with the copyright.
You're right in that it *is* more likely. In this case, however,
Xircom knew about the GPL, or GPV (General Public Virus) as one wag
put it. They knew they were obliged to make their source available,
and agreed to do so for those people willing to sign a nondisclosure
agreement. In spite of agreeing to do so, they will not.
"Honestly" is not the term I would use.
Boycotting Xircom because Russ Nelson and Don Faatz weren't
able to impose their will on the people running Xircom isn't my
idea of a worthy cause.
I'm not trying to impose my will on them. I'm just trying to make them
live up to their word. Right now, if someone from Xircom told me it was
sunny, I'd reach for my umbrella.
I can see where Mr. Nelson might be frustrated, and I'm sure he'll
make every effort to clarify the copyright conditions up front in
the future, but that's where it ends for me.
But I *DID* clarify them up front!
--
--russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667
It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dysonjim@rwsys.lonestar.org (James Wyatt KA5VJL .) (09/30/90)
On one hand, Jay writes (in article <4132@lib.tmc.edu>): >I think Russ is right on the money with this one. While I think the GNU Public >Virus...er...license amounts to software theft and should be boycotted itself, >the proper course for Xircom would have been to not use the code at all if >they were unhappy with the terms of the license. I ceased work on a >Clarkson-derived packet driver because of the GPV, and Xircom should have ... >I won't buy anything from them either. Then his signature says something I *really* like to remember: >Never ascribe to malice that which can >adequately be explained by stupidity. No one outside of (and few within) Xircom knows what *really* happened, but I'd buy their ignorance on the matter. We have come dangerously close to letting GPL code into things - it has good source at times, it's tempting to use it. Some software engineers recycle code by hoarding any code they can find and cutting/pasting small (or large) parts of it into later work. Things like reading the rest of the package for GPL can slip up. Once others within (or outside of) the group find out, the *only* honarable thing to do is withdraw the product and go back to the drawing board. Asking them to then publish the source is either greedy or stupid. Sounds like sour grapes too. I had to develop a network password encryption routine for my employer last year when one of the other SEs brought a program over to scavenge. "Where did it come from?" got a reply of "... a BBS, it's gotta be public!" - Bzzzzt! It was RCRYPT.EXE from Tandy's MSDOS - I checked where he didn't in the data area. It didn't put a banner up on use. I like GPL code (I am using GNU EMACS - that's why this is so long 8{) and I offer it to anyone who wants it. I also recommend against using it for anything more than study or personal use. It is just too easy to goof and use it in something you *don't* want to share in source form. Xircom makes very good products and has supported us very well - what else am I supposed to use on a laptop? I will be waiting for TCP/IP drivers, but I will *not* stop supporting a company that supports me and *tries* to do the right thing. Until then, their Novell and 3Com(munist) drivers work. On with Netware 3.1! ---- James Wyatt (KA5VJL) - Standard disclaimer applies... (H)214-579-0425 {letni.lonestar.org,merch.tandy.com}!rwsys.lonestar.org!jim (W)817-390-2864
ddl@husc6.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) (10/01/90)
In article <NELSON.90Sep29114633@image.clarkson.edu>, nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) writes: | In article <14568@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> dls@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (David L Stevens) writes: | | From what I've seen, and from what I know about people, I | doubt that there was any conspiracy to steal anything. More likely | is that they didn't even read the conditions applied to it and when | the knowledge of their mistaken violation finally made it to the | right people, they acted honestly and complied with the copyright. | | You're right in that it *is* more likely. In this case, however, | Xircom knew about the GPL, or GPV (General Public Virus) as one wag | put it. They knew they were obliged to make their source available, | and agreed to do so for those people willing to sign a nondisclosure | agreement. In spite of agreeing to do so, they will not. I hope no one takes this as a flame, but I suspect GNU/FSF proponents could help minimize incidents like this one by using more conventional terminology rather than inventing or redefining words that might have potentially misleading connotations. While it in no way excuses Xircom from ignoring the terms of the license, I think the words ``free'' and ``copyleft'' as used by FSF are likely to confuse people not familiar with the GNU license agreement. Before the FSF's usage, the term ``free'', when applied to software, often implied to many a lack of cost associated with use and/or distribution. Giving up control of proprietary code is a very real cost for many companies and they may not understand that this could be one of the costs associated with incorporating ``free'' software covered by the GNU license agreement into their product line. The non-word ``copyleft'' is probably even worse in that a corporate lawyer not aware of FSF policy may assume (foolishly, perhaps) that this is a cute way of saying that something is not covered by copyright, i.e., that it is in the public domain. Until ``copyleft'' finds its way into the legal texts (and dictionary) it might improve understanding if FSF advocates simply stated that their software is covered by a real copyright and that its use is governed by a license agreement whose terms might result in significant actual and perceived costs to certain users/distributors. Dan Lanciani ddl@harvard.*
news@adelphi.edu (News Feed) (10/02/90)
In article <NELSON.90Sep28233146@image.clarkson.edu>, nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) writes: > > [2] I have also been advised that, lacking copyright registration, all > that I could accomplish is to force you to stop distributing the driver, > which you have already agreed to do. > > -- > --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667 > It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dyson I myself hold 3 copyrights on software I developed for the printing industry dealing with CAM and I remember posing the following question to my lawyer: How long do I have to register my copyright, and when does the copyright take effect? According to him and the form TX as well as the related booklet on filing form TX from the Library of Congress, you have up to 2 years to file your copyright registration, and the code that comes off ones pen is copyright by him/her, as long as it is not a work for hire or contracted oherwise. The implied registration covers the period before registration. As a matter of fact my lawyer told me, and I did in all cases, to just file the docuemtation and a binary listing of the code, thus leaving the source to be considered "trade secret". He stated this gives better protection. My point is, why is the above listed driver not copyright in the same manner. I certainly am confused now. Can anyone state the facts? I hate to see people get burned like that.
hellier@skat.usc.edu (Chuck Hellier) (10/04/90)
In article <12920048@acf4.NYU.EDU> chapman@acf4.NYU.EDU (Gary W. Chapman) writes: >D-Link Systems Inc. >5 Musick >Irvine CA 92718 >714-455-1688 according to the 1990-91 LAN Times Buyers Guide > >Also with offices in Canada and the U.K. >Is there a packet driver for their products? > >-- Gary Chapman, New York University Yes, I'm using it now. I'm using a 286 with a parallel port, a thin ethernet connection, and a DE-600 Pocket LAN Adapter. Put them all together with your favorite packet driver-supporting TCP connectivity package (e.g. CUTCP, NCSA, PC/TCP) and you have a TCP Client. Using an IPX packet driver interface (e.g. BYU's) and NETx, you have simultaneous TCP and IPX connections. The performance is not bad... Novell's PERFORM2 revealed: Block size (1000 blocks xmitted) Ethernet Hardware 512 1024 1536 2048 DE-600 50.56 66.18 62.0 68.19 NE2000 93.81 127.23 129.98 143.88 (for comparison) The packet driver shipped with the DE-600 adapter is: DE600PD.COM 6645 bytes 8-9-90 8:46pm -- Chuck Hellier Internet: hellier@usc.edu Micro Systems Programmer UUCP: !uunet!usc!hellier University of Southern California Tel: (213) 743-5363
thomson@hub.toronto.edu (Brian Thomson) (10/04/90)
In article <NELSON.90Oct4104845@image.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes: >> Asking them to then publish the source is either greedy or stupid. >> Sounds like sour grapes too. > >Okay, you think I'm in the wrong. What compensation do you think is due me? >Hint: "none" is not an acceptable answer. I understand that you are angry, and I even understand why. But talking about compensation implies that you feel you have suffered damages, because that's what "compensation" compensates for. Personally, I would be very cautious about mounting a public campaign against a manufacturer, for fear that compensation might eventually flow in the other direction! It would be prudent to get a lawyer's opinion on this. -- Brian Thomson, CSRI Univ. of Toronto utcsri!uthub!thomson, thomson@hub.toronto.edu
nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (10/05/90)
In article <2810@rwsys.lonestar.org> jim@rwsys.lonestar.org (James Wyatt KA5VJL .) writes:
No one outside of (and few within) Xircom knows what *really* happened, but
I'd buy their ignorance on the matter.
First you have to find someone who claims that they were ignorant of the
GPL. They knew about it, and chose to ignore it.
Asking them to then publish the source is either greedy or stupid.
Sounds like sour grapes too.
Okay, you think I'm in the wrong. What compensation do you think is due me?
Hint: "none" is not an acceptable answer.
Xircom makes very good products and has supported us very well -
what else am I supposed to use on a laptop?
Talk to D-Link. They have a packet driver, understand free software, and
their adapter is cheaper!
D-Link Systems, Inc.
5 Musick
Irvine, CA 92718
714-455-1688
714-455-2521 fax
I will be waiting for TCP/IP drivers, but I will *not* stop
supporting a company that supports me and *tries* to do the right
thing.
Please show me how they have tried to do the right thing. They distributed
my code for a year in violation of their copyright.
I'm really sick and tired of people attributing ignorance and good faith to
Xircom. I realize that Xircom has been nice to you, but then again, they
can't rip *everyone* off...
--
--russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Russ.Nelson@$315.268.6667
It's better to get mugged than to live a life of fear -- Freeman Dysondra@neuro.usc.edu (Diane Annala) (10/08/90)
In article <NELSON.90Sep28233146@image.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes:
#
#Prudent or not, you agreed to do so, yet you have not. That makes you
#liars. I suggest to dear gentle readers that they keep that in mind.
#
# Xircom will be
# discontinuing the shipment of the Packet Driver based
# on the Clarkson Packet driver and will be replacing it
# with a fully compliant Packet Driver developed
# independently.
#
#You can bet your bippy I'm going to go over your "independently developed"
#packet driver with a fine-toothed comb.
Of course, Xircom could include a provision in their copyright notice
forbidding nelson@image.clarkson.edu from disassembling, decompiling,
or otherwise going over the new packet driver with a fine toothed comb.wittmann@erb1.engr.wisc.edu (art wittmann) (10/09/90)
In article <27414@usc.edu> dra@neuro.usc.edu (Diane Annala) writes: >In article <NELSON.90Sep28233146@image.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes: ># >#You can bet your bippy I'm going to go over your "independently developed" >#packet driver with a fine-toothed comb. > >Of course, Xircom could include a provision in their copyright notice >forbidding nelson@image.clarkson.edu from disassembling, decompiling, >or otherwise going over the new packet driver with a fine toothed comb. I doubt Russ will take my word for this, but I do know the folks that wrote the replacement driver for Xircom. The company that did the work (as far as I understand) is Persoft here in Madison. They've been using the generic FTP spec, but not Mr. Nelson's shell. Although I'm less sure of this, I believe they also wrote the Dlink driver. They've written drivers for a number of other boards as well. I understand that they perform quite well. I bring it up only to hopefully save Russ the time of checking over the new Xircom driver. I in no way feel that what Xircom did was appropriate. Respecting the intellectual property of others is a fundamental precept in this biz. Art =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Art Wittmann Phone: (608) 263-1748 Network Manager Email: wittmann@engr.wisc.edu Computer Aided Engineering Center or: wittmann@cae.wisc.edu University of Wisconsin, Madison
wales@valeria.cs.ucla.edu (Rich Wales) (10/09/90)
In article <NELSON.90Sep28233146@image.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes: You can bet your bippy I'm going to go over [Xircom's] "independently developed" packet driver with a fine- toothed comb. In article <27414@usc.edu> dra@neuro.usc.edu (Diane Annala) responds: Of course, Xircom could include a provision in their copyright notice forbidding nelson@image.clarkson.edu from disassembling, decompiling, or otherwise going over the new packet driver with a fine toothed comb. I seriously doubt any such copyright or license provision would be legally enforceable, if Russ Nelson's examination of Xircom's planned new driver did in fact show it to be derived from his own code in violation of the copyright thereon. Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and the above is not to be construed as legal advice. -- -- Rich Wales <wales@CS.UCLA.EDU> // UCLA Computer Science Department 3531 Boelter Hall // Los Angeles, CA 90024-1596 // +1 (213) 825-5683 "I do not know. I have never done this before."
sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) (11/08/90)
dra@neuro.usc.edu (Diane Annala) writes: |Of course, Xircom could include a provision in their copyright notice |forbidding nelson@image.clarkson.edu from disassembling, decompiling, |or otherwise going over the new packet driver with a fine toothed comb. Copyright law does not permit such restrictions to be made. Sean -- *** Sean Casey <sean@s.ms.uky.edu> *** ``HaaAhh Huhhhhhh!'' -James Brown (quote corrected by oz@nexus.yorku.ca)