JDYARD01@ULKYVX.BITNET (Jonathan D. Yarden) (09/08/88)
I am in the process, and have been for some years now, of writing a file archiver which I call NOAH. I originally intended this program to be for TRS-80's, but have been converting and modifying my code for the IBM and MSDOS world. With all of this PK vs SEA garbage that has come up, I have decided to hold off finishing NOAH until I am sure I won't get sued. This really pisses me off. I used widely known data compression algorithms, which anyone can find if they look in an engineering school library. I made no attempt to even duplicate SEA's file archiver, even though I am totally compatable with their file structure (It IS documented, and is NOT proprietary!). What specific legal rights would I have if I tried to sell this program? Or has SEA done what AT & T tried to do and have a monopoly? Yeh, I've seen the settlement notices, but that's all legal garbage. Phil Katz had every right to make and sell his program; He wrote it. Just because it can read/write SEA compatable archives can't possibly be cause for him to get sued. If that were the case, Fox Software couldn't have written FoxBase, Borland's Quattro couldn't read 123 files, etc. I think that all these suits and countersuits against "look and feel" need to stop. If a company wants to stay in business, then they have to produce a superior product. I think that what SEA has tried to do is just plain un-american. Without competition, companies would have no need to update their products and that would mean outdated (inferior) software. Jon Yarden ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- JDYARD01@ULKYVX.BITNET The opinions expressed above are entirely my own. If you don't like them, don't read them.
dave@sun.soe (Dave Goldblatt) (09/09/88)
From article <8809082220.AA27609@jade.berkeley.edu>, by JDYARD01@ULKYVX.BITNET (Jonathan D. Yarden): > [...] > With all of this PK vs SEA garbage that has come up, I have decided to hold > off finishing NOAH until I am sure I won't get sued. This really pisses > me off. I used widely known data compression algorithms, which anyone can > find if they look in an engineering school library. I made no attempt to > even duplicate SEA's file archiver, even though I am totally compatable > with their file structure (It IS documented, and is NOT proprietary!). > Right. The problem is this: Do you have the money to fight such a claim by SEA (or anyone else) against you? Unless you're a lawyer (or related to one!), it's doubtful. SEA supposedly licenses the "right" to create .ARC files for a dollar, but you'd have to contact them for details.. > What specific legal rights would I have if I tried to sell this program? > Or has SEA done what AT & T tried to do and have a monopoly? Yeh, I've > seen the settlement notices, but that's all legal garbage. Phil Katz had > every right to make and sell his program; He wrote it. Just because it > can read/write SEA compatable archives can't possibly be cause for him to > get sued. If that were the case, Fox Software couldn't have written FoxBase, > Borland's Quattro couldn't read 123 files, etc. > No one really knows what would happen in court, since the SEA vs. PKware case was settled. But again, he just didn't have the financial resources to fight the case. I never really considered Thom Henderson to pull something like this, and it's a sad commentary on his company, at least as far as I'm concerned. Fortunately, Rahul Dhesi is perfectly willing to release source code, and puts no claims on his compression or storage schemes.. ..so as soon as I find time, the CUHUG Opus (aka grape.ecs.clarkson.edu) will have its files converted to Zoo.. -dg- -- Internet: dave@sun.soe.clarkson.edu or: dave@clutx.clarkson.edu BITNET: dave@CLUTX.Bitnet uucp: {rpics, gould}!clutx!dave Matrix: Dave Goldblatt @ 1:260/360 ICBM: Why do you want to know? :-)