Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Marcel Kilgus wrote: > > I think I've never ever seen as many footnotes in a paper as in this > one. 398 footnotes on 79 pages, that's an average of 5 per page! > Truly amazing. > Morning Marcel, I take it you don't read Terry Pratchett novels then ? Lots of footnotes there too - most of them, highly amusing. Cheers, Norman. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 at 01:06:16, James Hunkins wrote: (ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) >One caution about reverse engineering; while it may be legal to do, >it is illegal to use 'borrowed' code in other code that you might >release or resell without permission. In some cases this might also >include a method of doing something (IE: software patents). > >There have been many cases recently where companies were sued for >having parts of someone else's code in their for sale code. > >A concern when changing jobs has to do with this. Someone with >intimate knowledge of someone's source code is considered risky to >another company with a similar product. Whether or not it is the >intention, it is difficult to not re-use code that one has seen else >where. Indeed yes. ... and you can be _sure_ the lawyers and courts would not understand the code. They would have to take the word of programmers, but would a third party programmer fully understand someone elses code? I suppose it is just like a judge trying to understand a _perfect_ forgery. ... and at what level does code become unique. As Marcel said, there is only _one_ way to set serial port baud rates on the QL. In a similar way, I find it bizarre that biologists can patent DNA. > And the original code is copyrighted or the implementation is >patented, hello fun with the legal system. Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 tony@.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 at 08:06:02, wrote: (ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) >I take it you don't read Terry Pratchett novels then ? >Lots of footnotes there too - most of them, highly amusing. Does anyone remember Martin Gardner? He came to the fore writing a mathematic puzzle column in Scientific American. He wrote "Annotated Alice" - expanding on both the Lewis Carrol Alice books. Well worth reading just for the gargantuan footnotes. Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 tony@.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Calendar programs
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 at 23:56:53, P Witte wrote: (ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) >Dilwyn Jones writes: > .. and the USA date format is totally confusing. 01/02/2006 is January 2nd whereas most of the world treat it as February 1st. >>> >>> It's pretty logcial though,they just write it as they speak it: >>> >>> January second two thousand six >>> as unfortunaltely, they are burdened (ha!) with then english >>> language which >>> puts the month first, then the day, then the year. >>> >> Nothing divides us as much as a common language eh? > >According to Oscar Wilde the British have everything in common with the >Americans except the language. A typical Wilde exaggeration, of course, but >perhpas he has a point.. There are so many totally different (but related) meanings: pants (what superman wears outside his trousers (8-)# ) fanny (_that_ one can be very embarrassing) bomb (as in parties) and so on. I was driving along through "Road Work" (and that is another) near Washington DC. The very large sign to the drivers said "Keep on the Pavement" - but the pavement was full of pedestrians (8-)# Tony -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 tony@.co.uk http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
James Hunkins wrote: > One caution about reverse engineering; while it may be legal to do, > it is illegal to use 'borrowed' code in other code that you might > release or resell without permission. Of course, this is simple copyright stuff. This is also the reason why companies usually do "clean-room" type reverse-engineering. This means that there are 2 teams, one which does the RE of the competition code and one which does the re-implementation. The first team just gives the second team the specification for the code, the second team thus is not "tainted" in any way by the original code. Most famous for this type of technique was the re-implementation of the first PC IBM BIOS. By Compaq, I think. > In some cases this might also include a method of doing something > (IE: software patents). Fortunately enough software patents are still an US problem only (mostly, the EU patent office regularly tries to grant sort-of software patents, but they are basically unenforceable in most countries). Though the industry is lobbying hard in Brussels to change this fact, but the last advance was actually put down by the European Parliament. For once they did their job. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Morning Marcel, > > I take it you don't read Terry Pratchett novels then ? Well, I own every single book of the discworld series. Except the last one which is still hardcover only. And it did remind me of it, but these paper gave the word "footnote" a truly new meaning. It's more of a, I don't know, "legnote" perhaps? Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
On Jan 16, 2006, at 7:11 AM, Marcel Kilgus wrote: > >> In some cases this might also include a method of doing something >> (IE: software patents). > > Fortunately enough software patents are still an US problem only > (mostly, the EU patent office regularly tries to grant sort-of > software patents, but they are basically unenforceable in most > countries). Though the industry is lobbying hard in Brussels to change > this fact, but the last advance was actually put down by the European > Parliament. For once they did their job. There is a big push in the States against software patents in general. An uphill battle but I don't mind helping with the push. jim ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
On Jan 16, 2006, at 4:18 AM, Tony Firshman wrote: > ... and at what level does code become unique. > As Marcel said, there is only _one_ way to set serial port baud > rates on > the QL. Luckily, one of the key points in patents is that patents can not be done on something that is obvious. In other words, if there is only one way to do something and anyone would be able to figure it out, it can't be patented. I would suspect that copyright also goes along this line. Something about it having to be completely original to start with to be copyrightable. Unfortunately, as you said, the courts are not always very aware of anything to do with coding so can often be swayed incorrectly. jim ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
James Hunkins wrote: > Luckily, one of the key points in patents is that patents can not be > done on something that is obvious. Muahahaha, that was a good one! It might be nice in theory, but in real life I'm amazed nobody has patented "intake and output of oxygen containing gas in order to produce energy rich molecules" (aka breathing) yet. Or, perhaps somebody has? It wouldn't amaze me at all. Granted, many of those absurd patents can be successfully battled in court. If you have enough time and most of all, enough money, that is. But they do get granted often enough. Patents really were a nice and sound concept once, but abuse is so rampant that it's not funny anymore. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
On 15 Jan 2006, at 17:20, Tony Firshman wrote: >>> >>> Is this true even though the altered program is merely used >>> privately? >>> >> >> Yes (unless of course, the licence allows it). If you make any >> change to the >> program you're normally breaking the licence. >> >> Generally speaking, there are no "private use" provisions in any >> law I know >> of, contrary to what happens in some countries with copies of >> audio visual >> works. > There is in the UK for solo songs. One is allowed to make one extra > copy, to allow use of an accompanist. >> >> Even simply reverse engineering (i.e. just de-compiling) may be >> against the >> law... Hmmm!! Apart from spending quite a lot of time disassembling programs I also copy quite a lot of music. Perhaps I should be behind bars instead of playing them George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
- Original Message - From: "George Gwilt" Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering > Hmmm!! Apart from spending quite a lot of time disassembling > programs I also copy quite a lot of music. Perhaps I should be behind > bars instead of playing them Has anybody extract (and used) the MC extensions, which were used in CADPAK (a graphics and paint program), the mouse version, which was delivered with the Sandy SQB with mouse (the so called "SuperMouse")? This program still run under SMSQ/E and the extension code is quite short. It supports the primary window, the pointer, both buttons and return codes for x- and y movement. The only problems are of course the parameters ;-). Cheers...Ralf R. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Calendar programs
Tony Firshman wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 at 17:29:28, Phoebus R. Dokos wrote: > (ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) > > >> >> >>>I do personally too. >>>All our timber merchants still sell imperial sizes, but display them >>>metric - which is bizarre. >>> >>> >>So they sell Two by Fours but say: 60.8cm x 121.60cm ? >> > Exactly, but they use mm. > The figures, being so large and strange, are incomprehensible. > As you say, we simply ask for it in imperial and they sell and label in > metric. According to my [US: Collins] encylopedia, in 1959 the yard was redefined to be EXACTLY 0.9144m, and the pound as redefined to be EXACTLY 0.45359237Kg, effective July 1, 1959. So asking in imperial is actually asking in metric! (The "inch" is the name for a distance of 0.0254m.) ^_^ ... > ... and we will _never lose our 568 ml beer glasses. > I got stuck there finding the value, as the web sites I found were > dominated by US, so plenty of conversions of pint to cup. Now that is a > _really_ stupid measure! > and _why_ is the US gallon 80% of the imperial gallon? Probably because their pint = 16FlOz to match 1lb = 16Oz, whereas the imperial pint = 20flOz. And that could be due to a pint of water (at stp, I presume) weighing 1lb exactly in one of the systems (which I'm not sure now). ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Hunkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >On Jan 16, 2006, at 4:18 AM, Tony Firshman wrote: >> ... and at what level does code become unique. >> As Marcel said, there is only _one_ way to set serial port baud >> rates on >> the QL. > >Luckily, one of the key points in patents is that patents can not be >done on something that is obvious. In other words, if there is only >one way to do something and anyone would be able to figure it out, it >can't be patented. I would suspect that copyright also goes along >this line. Something about it having to be completely original to >start with to be copyrightable. I don't know about patents, yet with copyright it only has to be an original work, not completely original. If the latter were true, then there would only be one detective novel, etc ... :-) -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] Reverse engineering
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, James Hunkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes >One caution about reverse engineering; while it may be legal to do, >it is illegal to use 'borrowed' code in other code that you might >release or resell without permission. In some cases this might also >include a method of doing something (IE: software patents). > >There have been many cases recently where companies were sued for >having parts of someone else's code in their for sale code. > >A concern when changing jobs has to do with this. Someone with >intimate knowledge of someone's source code is considered risky to >another company with a similar product. Whether or not it is the >intention, it is difficult to not re-use code that one has seen else >where. And the original code is copyrighted or the implementation is >patented, hello fun with the legal system. In practice that is very hard to do . should every piece of software re-invent the wheel ? Complex software projects are now not hand-coded in the way that they used to be, because code is more system-oriented and modular. Even the code creators do not understand how it all works, as they are encouraged to employ existing modules and methods that are known to operate effectively. Not like the QDOS/SMSQ/E code writers though ... :-) -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
