Slashdot Mirror
Linux Drivers For Free Barcode Scanner Cease-And-D...
> How complicated is the driver/what does it do?
It isn't terribly complicated. There's two programs that I wrote in the package, and one I did not. All are based on the "libcue" I wrote, also in the package. The deocder algorithm is a simple modified base-64 XOR 67. Jean-Philippe 'JP' Sugarbroad figured it out, and Colin Cross wrote code based on it and made me aware of it. I re-implemented it for the learning experience. The program named "decode" reads in a line of output from the cuecat for stdin or as first argument. CueCat output looks like this:
<ALT-F10>.C3nZC3nZC3nYDhv7D3DWCxnX.cGf2.ENr7C3b3DNbWChPXDxzZDNP6.
decode splits the Cue output into fields separeted buy ".". It ignores the first field and runs the rest through the base64+XOR decoder. This becomes the first line output. Digital Converegence added some additional "encryption" to their Web service; their program takes the output of the cuecat and inverts its case befoe sending it off to http://[server].dcnv.com/CRQ/1..[activation code].04.[cuecat scan].0
[Server] can be a, o, s, t, or u. [activation code] is supposed to be the activation code you get from your registration, but can be simply "ACTIVATIONCODE", which is actually what my spftware puts there. [cuecat scan] is the raw output of the device, minus the ALT-F10, with case inverted. Their servers send back a little blob of text containing several fields, including a suggested URL and description. Libcue parses those out and makes them available to its clients. Here's the scan of an NADA car-guide book:
The output of decode looks like this
DATA 000000001768443202 IB5 978034533392650599
CUE 0345333926
AMAZON 0345333926
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345333926/104-2159322-9263954
Ringworld Larry Niven
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0345333926.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif
The gnome panel applet reads in CueCat scans, looks up the :Cue at DCNV servers, and redirects Netscape to the suggested site, if any.
> What does their commercial software do exactly?
The same thing mine does, without the amazon lookup and with some annoying GUI features, like a tabbed CueCat panel.
> How many lines of code?
1258 according to "cat cuecat-applet.c cuecat-applet.h decode.c decode.h libcue.c libcue.h | wc -l"
Michael makes another interesting point in a seperate e-mail
When they sent the letter (Aug. 30), my software did not touch the DCNV servers to look up :Cues. It simply decoded the data, and if an ISBN number was scanned, the panel applet made Netscape go to the Amazon page blindly: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/[isbn number here].
So it was not the use of DCNV servers they objected to, but the mere decoding of the output of the cuecat. I didn't release the :Cue and Amazon lookup-enabled version until yesterday (Aug. 31), when the FedEx letter arrived by overnight delivery.
Thanks to Michael for taking the time to answer this stuff. It's pretty scary when the stuff that you have can't be poked at without a corporation demanding you stop. Imagine if Ford had said you can't open the hoods of your car a hundred years ago.
Update: 09/01 02:49 PM by CT : Freshmeat has a perl script CueCat Decoder that will also decode the CueCat's output.
Update: 09/01 02:57 PM by CT : Russel Nelson pointed out that Lineo's Driver has also been taken down following a cease and desist from Digital Convergence (CueCat's parent).
It's called the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Note that I didn't use a CueCat. This was several months ago, before the CueCat program started -- I just went out and bought a scanner. Nonetheless, you could do the same thing, and I've gotten email from people who plan to.
Feel free to use my code. Python scripts, GPL, kind of ugly (and note that one needs correction since Amazon changed their page layout.)
I signed nothing, I read nothing, I didn't even give them my name. I ripped open the bag, tossed the papers and CD in my pile of useless CD's. I took a screwdriver to the case and looked inside (rather dull actually).
I agreed to NOTHING!
In short, it is mine to do with as I will. I can write other software for it, sell or give it to someone else, let my dog chew on it or take it out back and use it for target practice.
I'm surprised they found a lawyer who'd even write up the cease and desist as they don't have a case. It's been decided by the courts before, if you give something away for free it's no longer yours to control.
I think he should go to court just so we can hear the judge and lawyers say "flying butt monkeys" a lot
The encoding is a base64 (not MIME tho) with a random XOR thrown in. Each letter is a base 64 (6 bit) number, a is 0, z is 25, A is 26, Z is 51, 0 is 52, 9 is 61, + is 62, - is 63 (and fill in the blanks between there). A group of four of these 6 bit numbers are combined into a single 24 bit number, which is then split into three 8 bit ASCII codes (XORed with 67).
Taral corrected my first perl script to solve the short code problem. If a group of 4 characters is not complete (ie there are only 2 characters), it should be padded with 0's ('a' in the base64 encoding), and then follow the same decoding process. Then chop off the same number of characters from the decoded string that were padded onto the encoded string.
No tables/codes should be used anywhere - it is simply a coincidence that they work for numeric values, because the top 4 bits of all the number ASCII codes are the same, 0011 binary.
If you want to print your own barcodes I suggest the encoding called "Code 128". I found a company (Elfring Fonts) that sells windows fonts and software to make it easy to encode your own stuff: http://www.barcodingfonts.com/
---
Don Rude - AKA - RudeDude
RudeDude
Perl/Linux/PHP hacker
If anyone has a new version, please put it up somewhere 0.05 is here
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
At which point, the software for Linux is compariable to clean room interoperability (legal by DCMA) and to junkbuster. Both which are legal, AFAIK.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Betcha most of them fit into under a page, and well within the constraints of a ./ message...
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
The same principle will hold true for just about any language offering easy access to hash tables; the program can be made data-driven, and be both minscule and incredibly fast.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
What needs to be written is the "user space" side of things, which essentially amounts to an interface that takes ISBN numbers read using the scanner and then "does something useful."
That's not "device driver" work; that's application work. Feel free to be inspired to work on apps or drivers; don't assume that the info here provides any guidance on dealing with device drivers.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Ok, this has gone far enough.
Here's my mirror of one of the packages, a description of the encoding and a taunt for Digital Convergance to 'come get some'. http://www.beau.lib.la.us/~jmorris/linux/cuecatDemocrat delenda est
No no no, it was after she spilled the coffee that this info was found. Listen I believe she was in part responsible for what happaned the problems with this case that no one seems to bring are:
1. McD was heating the coffee at 180 degrees instead of 140 which is the "safe" limit
2. The management of that particular McD was incontact with the head office telling the head office that the coffee requirement was too hot and their customers were complaining. (The head office specified the 180 deg temp)
3. The woman only originally asked for McD to pay PART of her medical bill. She knew she did something dumb, but the severity of the burns were because the coffe was unsafe to even drink.
4. McD refused, and a fat lawyer got involved who uncovered the previous complaints as well ast the comunications with the head office about the temperature of the coffee.
5. Her lawyer sued.
6. She was awarded 10 million, Which was later put aside. (IE she never got it)
7. McD now heats their coffee to 140 degrees which is still DAMN hot. Go try some.
8. McD but this stupid lill warning on the cups saing "Contents are hot!" and fed the media about how people don't take responsibility for their actions.
9. A lot of people BOUGHT it.
The way I see it McD was at least in part at fault in this case. But THEY refused to admit it and it cost them.
---------------------------
Yes there is a lot of I'ts not my fault I'll sue cases in this country.. this was not one of them.
Ex-Nt-User
that serial number is probably easily matched up to the store where you picked up your cuecat device, or even to your name if you gave it to the clerk at the store.
Ummm... No.
The clerk who took my name entered it into the computer and then scanned the cuecat (or the catalog, I'm not sure) before giving it to me. Even if the serial number wasn't definantly associated with the identity I gave at time of purchase, it was certainly associated with the store location. There's no doubt that Digital Convergance would keep track of which serial numbers got shipped to which Radio Shack locations.
Furthermore, from what I've heard there's a potentially identity revealing registration process one must complete in order to use the Windows software.
Even if Digital Convergence doesn't know a person's exact identity, they know at the very minimum what Radio Shack store the scanner came from and thus very approximately where they live in most cases. And that's more than enough to increase the value of any marketing/profileing data they collect substantially.
Every cuecat scan results in some garbage that looks like the following:
Hidden inside that code is the barcode type, and its numeric or alphanumeric equivilent. But there's more: There's also a serial number. And that serial number is probably easily matched up to the store where you picked up your cuecat device, or even to your name if you gave it to the clerk at the store.
The first item in the second line is the serial number. Then the barcode, and then the numeric value of the UPC type A code. This serial number stuff is real bad news. It's like a cookie that can't be turned off, and it gets sent to Digital Convergence every time you scan a barcode that brings you to a web site using their software.
Of course, they're going to be pissed about people using their barcode scanners without their spying software: They want to make money by seling your personal information. They know where you live. They know what books you read, and they know what products you buy, all by what you scan with their little cuespy.
The cease and desist letter they've sent is a vague piece of crap. Its sole intent is to intimidate. They have no legal standing. First spying, now intimidation tactics? I think perhaps it's time for a TLO to investigate Digitial Convergence.
I've mirrored the standalone cuecat decoder software at http://osiris.978.org/~brianr/cuecat/.
Is this device covered by some sort of EULA (not the software, but rather the device) that prevents reverse engineering? If not, than they have nothing to sue over, besides standard legal manipulations that we're all familiar with. This needs to be delt with quickly and appropiatly, by retaining legal council and verifying that they have no legal leg to stand on.
Is this a forbringer of a day where reverse engineering is illegal? Where everything is sealed and consumers own nothing but rent them from major corporations? Maybe not, but it's enough to make one wonder.
If there's ambiguities, etc. that either invalidate or otherwise, they can't claim that the interpretation that is most favorable is the one that's the correct interpretation. Legally speaking, they have to be explicit in everything or it causes a loophole. Since they weren't explicit on the packaging, a claim on the WWW site doesn't give them footing in this regard.
(Just because it's in the boilerplate at any location, doesn't mean it's legit- loads of companies alike try to pull fast ones all the time!)
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
When I got mine (two of them) from Radio Shack,
they just handed me the Cue:Cat in a baggie
w/a CD-ROM, and a catalog. There is no legal
license agreement saying I have to agree to
anything to use the hardware - *ONLY* if you
install the software (on a Windows box) do you
have to agree to anything. I dont see where
they have a case here. Nothing is being
reverse-engineered, its only being decoded and
interpeted.
I'm going to write them - I was planning on
writing a review of the unit in conjunction
with the Sun PS/2 keyboard interface box and
Sun's PCi pc-on-a-card product for PCI-bus
SPARCstations (I actually got it to work).
Now, I'll throw it in a drawer, and put up
mirrors of this guy's code alongside my
DeCSS archives.
To whom it may concern:
When I first heard about the Cuecat device I must admit
I was impressed. I wanted one and, hey, it's free!
Imagine my dismay when on the same *day* I picked up
a Cuecat from Radio Shack your company and it's lawyers
decided to issue a cease-and-desist letter to the author
of one of the few peices of cuecat decoding software
for my choice of operating system. I am not pleased.
As I'm sure you're aware, the Sega vs. Accolade case
(among others) solidified the legality of the reverse
engineering of technology for the purposes of
interopability. You cannot use an unenforceable licence
to stifle it, nor can your bullying tactics dam the flood
of Free Software Cuecat decoders.
The way I see it you have two choices. 1) Continue your
fruitless bullying efforts and alienate the entire
Free Software and Open Source community (incedently,
said communities are composed of very, very influental
personalities.) 2) Embrace the Free Software and
Open Source communities and work *WITH* the authors
designing Cuecat software (and possibly *gasp* contribute
*code* to their projects...) and reap the benefits of
an expanded user base.
The choice is yours, though the only reason I can
imagine you not opting for choice 2 is that you're
doing something unspeakable in the guts of your
C.R.Q. software.
I myself an am influential person. I provide support
and advice for many companies and individuals in the
St. Louis area. If your lawyer-dogs are not reigned
in promptly I will have no choice but to caution
my family, friends and my paying customers to not
use your Cuecat device, your Convergance Cable device nor,
especially, your C.R.Q. software.
I have already downloaded several alternative Cuecat
decoding software packages. The most useful of which
is a book cataloging package. I intend to use and share
these pieces of software freely. I also intend to use
my skills to improve and refine them. This can not be
illegal, nor I might add immoral. You have given me a
device that can be used for more than it's intended
purpose, and for that I thank you.
In closing, I'd like to add that people like me, hobbiests,
hackers, and just plain inquisitive people made the Internet
into the tool that it is today. The tool that you use
for your marketing purposes and the tool you have based
your business model on. Let me re-iterate: Hackers
built the Internet. It is not wise to raise the ire of
the same people who provide you with your email. Your
web services. Who create the protocols you depend on.
Who route your packets. You want bullying? Well there
it is.
Re7+!!
End Game. Your move.
--J(K) DOS is like Unix in exactly the same way that a pinto is like an aircraft carrier.
True, but right now I'm free to use e.g. yesterday's newspaper instead of TP, and even if I bought toilet paper, I'm not legally obligated to hire the midget to use it.
Certainly. Human nature is what it is. I'm just bitching because most people seem so damn naive about it...
DNA just wants to be free...
Nader calls this Corporate Socialism. I'm beginning to think he has a point.
Some days I wonder if we're headed toward a society where you can't even wipe your own butt for yourself, instead of having some corporation do it for you (for a nominal fee).
If you did it yourself, you'd be depriving some butt-wiping company of revenue, you see. Putting honest, hard-working people out of jobs, for heaven's sakes!
(if you disagree, you're a communist butt pirate and should be shipped off for re-education)
This is severe hyperbole, of course, but unfortunately something very near that mindset is truly already out here in corporate-land.
DNA just wants to be free...
IANAL
These people do not understand that we are not tring to any wrong.
Message to the company
We are just creating an application that can use YOUR product. We would think you would be happy about this. Do you understand if your company tries and stop people from exploring the possiblity with your product. That you will hurt only your own sales. Instead of tring to stop this you should at least try and work with the people who could possibily be creating a set of customers for you.
Well, no. There's no fine print in a cash transaction. I went to Radio Shack. I gave them money for a purchase, and this was included for free. No contract was signed, so the Uniform Commecrial Code applies. A contract was fixed at the time of sale. I gave them my name, address, etc. They gave me the scanner. A simple quid pro quo transaction. The fact that there's a piece of paper in the packet that purports to be an enforcible contract is really laughable. It is invalid and cannot be enforced. This is doublely true if you never installed the software. If you did, The Cat people can say that you agreed to the contract since the packaging for the cdrom contained the right warning lables. Since I never installed the software, or even opened the cd package, I never agreed to a modification of the contract that was fixed at the time of sale.
In other words, They are going to have a hard time enforcing the supposed contract.
In addition, the item was not free, but given to me (and everybody else) for good and fair compensation, namely the personal information. It can be shown that this information has a monitary value (just look at how much email lists and snailmail lists sell for), and therefore the exchange could likely be viewed as a "sale" for the purposes of the uniform commercial code.
Software is a special case because it has labels on it stating that you are agreeig to a license, plus presents you with the license and a chance to repudiate the license and get a refund (in theory at least, when was the last time someone was able to return software they didn't like the license terms to, say, CompUSA).
So I think they are SOL unless you installed their driver software. Which I've never done. I've not even taken it out of the packaging.
P.S. If I were the author that got such a C&D letter, then I'd demand they get a whole lot more specific about what, exactly, was in violation. Such vague letters are easy and cheap to write and are meaningless in many cases because they aren't specific. Ask them for specifics. What, specifically, are they objecting to. What gives them the legal right to object to it (copyright claim, granted patent claim, trade secret, etc) so you have a chance to audit their claims. If they refuse, then you are in a much better position later if they file legal action against you.
Its probably not worth it. They're just sending threatening letters with vague comments about "intellectual property". I fail to see any protectable intellectual property in what they do, or what the Linux drivers do. You can't copyright protocols, they have not patents I'm aware of, there's no trademark infringement. All thats been done is the reverse engineering of something they might consider to be a trade secret, but in themselves trade secrets have not legal protection.
They haven't a leg to stand on, and I doubt they'll even find grounds to sue.
I just e-mailed copyleft with this rather obvious, but funny idea. Take the core of the code, the part that handles the actual communication with the device, and encode it in a barcode font. Print on t-shirt.
Beautiful, no?
-Waldo
-------------------
What's incredible about this is that CueCat seems to make money from various other streams (licensing fees, privacy violations, etc.), so I can't imagine why they'd be opposed to geeks embracing their technology. This is extremely shortsighted of them.
What I enjoy knowing is that there's that *one* Linux user that works for them. S/he's quietly sitting in the corner, head shaking, saying "I told you so...."
Don't mess with Tuxas. (Or something like that.)
-Waldo
-------------------
Hmm. Supposedly if J. Random Hacker writes software that causes (say) a $1000-- loss to a given corporation, this corporation can sue J. R. to recover this amount of money.
But if J. R. writes software that causes our hypothetical corporation to have an increase of (again, say) $1000--, does this mean that the corporation has to sue J. R. to pay her or him some or all of this negative damage?
Maybe these suits are afraid of & the cost of tracking down random hackers to reimberse them for their contributions.
In a nutshell, this is what this whole stupid act on the basis of these legal sharks come down to: someone writes software that increases the market for their hardware, & they get told to stop it.
And if I'm being a smart-*ss about this, it's Friday & these same legal sharks don't deserve any more of my attention than that.
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
I had a couple minutes and wanted to see what I could find out about James Rosini, the man who signed the LegalLetter. The only notable thing I found was that he represented AT&T when AOL tried to sue over their supposed trademark of "You've Got Mail." Here's a link: http://techlawjournal.com/cour ts/aolvatt/Default.htm
-- Grow up and use mutt.
If these bizarre things could be compiled into an on-line database, perhaps it would ease the research burden of any idealistic lawyer who feels like attempting a counter-suit. Or maybe the EFF or the Greens or some such group could organize a class-action suit, on behalf of all U.S. citizens who aren't corporations.
WWJD for a Klondike Bar?
Read the radio shack website for the necessary clue of WHY they're doing this. Companies don't give things away for free just for fun. There's always a catch that allows them to make money. In this case, its marketing info. This is a quote from the faq at Radio Shack "What happens to my personal information (like my name, address, and e-mail address) when I register and use the :CueCat?
Any personal information (such as your name, address and e-mail address) collected online
when you register and use your new :CueCat is held and owned by Digital Convergence
Corporation (not RadioShack). To view Digital Convergence's privacy policy, Click here.
Unless you give Digital Convergence permission to share your personal information with us,
or unless you register or purchase on RadioShack.com or volunteer information at a
RadioShack store, you and your shopping habits remain anonymous to RadioShack.com.
Click here to view RadioShack.com's privacy policy."
They only gave you this "handy" device because they want you to register and and scan lots of barcodes, so they have lots and lots of information about your personal interests, so they can sell your information to direct marketers (think human spam).
When you write a linux driver, you bypass all the secret sending of private info to their servers, which means they can't make money off you.
I believe one or more companies have patented the "idea" of using barcodes in printed advertising to link consumers to web sites, and to allow price comparisons. They are probably referring to some kind of patent in this space.
I threw mine away the day it arrived in the mail. Can they force me to go the town landfill and hunt for it if they "recall it at any time"?
I don't fs*kn think so....
Regardless of the temperature, I find it ridiculous that McDs lost the suit. It's friggin coffee. If you put coffee (HOT) in your crotch and drive, you SHOULD get burned, and probably be beaten to death for the rest of your life for being a risk to other drivers.
Personally, I far prefer to use the instance of a boat enthusiast on Lake Michigan suing Weather24.com for the cost of his boat + pain and suffering for failing to mention a storm in the area that ended up sinking his boat. It's a much better example of litigous idiocy.
Notice that on the second page of the letter from KENYON & KENYON they cc: a certain John Huncke, Digital:Convergence Executive Vice President of Business Affairs. From checking his bio linked above, you can see that he previously was an attorney for various media corporations and "a clerk at The Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas during Hillary Clinton's tenure", which should tell you a lot about his outlook towards intellectual property and innovation.
I walked in to RS, asked if they had any, the guy threw one down on the counter, I picked it up, and left. I agreed to no restrictions, signed no documents, did not even give them my name. The packaging required to get through to open the cutcat hardware had no licenses or references to licenses. I broke no seals beyond ordinary packaging (plastic bag). The hardware component itself has no reference to licensing, beyond, "For home or office use" and the fact that it is patent pending.
:cue:cat "reads any product code and isntantly transports you to the corresponding website"
Even moreso, it was manufactured by Tandy, NOT Digital Convergence. it was manufacuted under some agreement.
The instruction booklet has no license agreement or mention thereof.
It says the
I have not opened the CRQ Software package, and cannot be held to licenses within it.
I'd love to see Digital Convergence try to take it back and not get charged with theft.
(What's the PC term for "indian giver"?
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
Eh? Even if I were to accept the wildly controversial assertion that opening the software causes you to be bound by the license, there's still a big problem: just about everyone here (except for the Windows users) didn't open the software. The CueCat got plugged into the computer, and the unopened Windows software went into the trash, just like the Windows drivers disk that comes with most the hardware that we buy.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
So if your code looks nothing like theirs, they won't be able to prove that you violated their copyright by posting it, and everything will be copacetic.
Of course, IANAL.
And I'm glad I downloaded that stuff yesterday.
--
send all spam to theotherwhitemeat@ropine.com
Now, CueCat, I'm guessing is concerned that RadioShack will stop giving away the scanners because they can be hacked to work with competing barcodes. Thus they'll stop sending money to cue cat. But I don't see any legal basis for there case. I mean no copyrights were infringed, no licenses broken. Reverse engineering (outside of the realm of the DMCA possibly), is a long defended right. If CueCat does sue, I can't imagine they'd stand a chance.
That being said, if one cannot afford the lawyers and take the risk of being sued, then this may be a somewhat moot point (and you know cuecat is hoping for that). So, everybody get your check books ready, looks like we're gonna have to send some more funding to smack down the dumb corporations.
---
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
These guys are funded by Microsoft. If you doubt it, check out Net Talk Live, another one of their operations here in Dallas. If anyone does get into a legal process with them, be sure to demand in discovery to see all the agreements they have made with Microsoft to ensure that only Windows gets any support from this device.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I wrote a Javascript :CueCat decoder-- is it illegal? I certainly do not have the legal resources or time to stand up to a challenge like this at all-- if I get a letter of some sort like this down the road, what can I do short of going to court? If there aren't any other options, I will have to take it down when the letter comes. I thought I was being a general nice guy, and providing a useful tool for people. What is wrong with decoding the output of a barcode reader? Does this make cash registers illegal? Libraries?
I find it rather troubling to hear that DC is threatening legal action against people who use its product (the CueCat) under Linux by writing their own software to interface with it. Perhaps you could explain to your customers why you choose to threaten them, without the cloak of legal doubletalk. All in all, this is definitely a great way to stir up support for your product on the Net. I'll be sure to throw away my CueCat as soon as I get home from work, and tell my friends to do the same.
I wonder why they don't send a nastygram to the folks at http://www.readerware.com/ also?
> But there's more: There's also a serial number.
So take your kid to RS, put his name on the forms, and tell him to scan the bejesus out of everything he sees for a week.
Then you can send them an e-mail that says "Go directly to jail".
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
It's simple. They give the software away for free, but you have to register at their website and give them an e-mail address and fill out some demographic information. That way they can make all sorts of fun lists indexed by e-mail address of what products interest you in the Radioshack Catalog, and what other items you are scanning. It's one big demographic information gatherer.
Unauthorized software allows the possibility of an end-run around their demographic gathering. It destroys their poorly thought out business model. They don't gather this information, they don't make money.
BIG FAT IANAL
A friend of mine pointed out that Cuecats are being sent to various subscribers of Wired and Forbes and possibly other magazines as a promotion.
Now IIRC, federal law states that any unsolicited merchandise received by mail is a gift. This federal law would supercede any click through license agreement. It's no longer theirs, and you're free to do with the hardware as you see fit.
I took a look at the letter and nearly fell out of my chair laughing. Here are some pieces:
"It further includes not only the direct infringement made by Flyingbuttmonkeys.com, but also any infringement which Flyingbuttmonkeys.com induces others to perform. The longer that Flyingbuttmonkeys.com continues its improper activities, the longer damages will accrue."
and further on
"both we and Digital Convergence intend to continue monitoring the activities of Flyingbuttmonkey.com...".
improper activities of flying butt monkeys! monitored by our learned friends at Kenyon & Kenyon!! ROTFL!
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
You think the lawyer's haven't already thought of that?
Besides, that means they'd have to store bazillions of those damn contracts. Overhead that would eventually cost more than the cuecats themselves.
BTW, thanks for the polite reply, 5h1tf@ce.
I am writing to express my utter disgust with your corporation's heavy handed
tactics against innocent programmers trying to use the CueCat on other
operating systems. The free CueCat software that has been developed and
posted to the Internet in no way infringes on your intellectual property. It
is simply a driver for the device! I am certain that no use was made of your
copyrighted material (i.e. software that came with the cuecat) to learn to
decode the cuecat's output. (It really is not a difficult thing to do simply
by analyzing the output of the device.) Also, note that users of the cuecat
are not required to sign any form of non-disclosure agreement so no
"intellectual property" could be released there. As for Trade Secrets, do you
think that someone broke into your property to steal a secret that could be
decoded by anyone with a pencil, paper, and a bit of time?
Obviously, we aren't talking about patents here or trademarks. So nothing is
left. Your use of the legal system to stifle free development of software that
supports your device is utterly reprehensible and you deserve to be sued for
harassment!
It looks like the same policy as the IEEE, standards may use patented inventions but the patent holder is required to license the patent under openly specified, reasonable, non-discriminatory terms.
US Code Title 39, Part IV, Chapter 30, Section 3009. Here is an excerpt:
(b) Any merchandise mailed in violation of subsection (a) of this section, or within the exceptions contained therein, may be treated as a gift by the recipient, who shall have the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender. All such merchandise shall have attached to it a clear and conspicuous statement informing the recipient that he may treat the merchandise as a gift to him and has the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender.
This section also references Title 15, Chapter 2, Subchapter 1, Section 45, regarding unfair business practices. I thing The barcode scanner manufactures could sue DigitalDirtbags on unlawful distribution.
US Code Title 39, Part IV, Chapter 30, Section 3009. Here is an excerpt:
(b) Any merchandise mailed in violation of subsection (a) of this section, or within the exceptions contained therein, may be treated as a gift by the recipient, who shall have the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender. All such merchandise shall have attached to it a clear and conspicuous statement informing the recipient that he may treat the merchandise as a gift to him and has the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender.
This section also references Title 15, Chapter 2, Subchapter 1, Section 45, regarding unfair business practices. I thing The barcode scanner manufactures could sue on unlawful distribution.
Postage Due.
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wagn'nagl dominos.
You can only drink 30 or 40 glasses of beer a day, no matter how rich you are.
-- Colonel Adolphus Busch
Quite right. If they want a contract to stick they need to make it known beforehand. "Sir, if you'd like one of our free barcode scanners and will agree to our agreement, you can have it."
Same goes for EULAs. If you buy something and didn't agree to a contract beforehand, you can use the software in any way you see fit, as if it were a book. The maker has no more power to restrict your actions than a book publisher has to restrict who can read the book, etc.
You may be bound by a license if you use the free software, because you haven't already paid to use it, but if it was bundled with the scanner which was a gift for making a purchase (ie, they gave it to you) then you're safe there too.
Yes that is the one thing ConversantShogun pointerd out here... The whole license is contingent on you seeing it. I checked everything that came in the little plastic baggie, including the manual and the CD case and there was no copy of the license there. It just said that using the software was contingent on accepting the license - it never said anything about any license associated with using the hardware... loophole possibly?
Here is the exact text, from their site: :CueCat reader is only on loan to you from Digital:Convergence and may be recalled at any time. Without limiting the foregoing, your possession or control of the :CueCat reader does not transfer any right, title or interest to you in the :CueCat reader.
The
If you want to view it yourself, check here and go down to the third heading called "Permitted Uses and Restrictions". Read about halfway down that section, then be careful you don't hurt youself as your jaw drops into your lap.
And he runs the site named "/."
Sir,
Please remember that when you acquired the refrigerator the notice on the box required that you only use it for storing USDA-approved food, that it be filled only by a licensed professional, and that cleaning be done only by our certified maintenance facilities. We have noted that users often lose the magnetic external storage accessories, but you can easily buy approved replacements at the manufacturer's official web site. Violation of your usage license or use of unapproved accessories requires that you return the appliance immediately, without opening it after the violation occurs.
I and a friend here were under the impression that if one uses an IETF standard, e.g. RFC 1341 which defines Base64 encoding, one is obligated to allow others to use it freely. I can't find an explicit statement of that yet on the IETF pages, but if this is the case it would seem that Digital Convergence would be the ones in violation.
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
NO! We should NOT keep writing software for this device. There are plenty of reasonably priced bar code readers out there that don't even require drivers at all (their interfaces are typically described as "keyboard wedges" - they lierally make it look like you typed in the info. - all the magic happens in the hardware!)
Why should we even dignify a such a proprietary device with our support, especially after their behaviour and with good, and open alternatives? Simple bar code readers just aren't that expensive, guys... Go grab a cheap one, get a Code 39 (3 of 9) bar code font and go to town. (There are several other formats, but Code 39 is kind of the Lingua Franca of the bar code world, and I've found it the most common and standard format int he past...)
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
From the Permitted Uses and Restrictions section of the CueCat license:
You acknowledge that the Software and :CueCat reader contain trade secrets and other proprietary information of Digital:Convergence and its licensors. Except as expressly permitted in this License, you may not decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, rent, lease, loan, sublicense, distribute or create derivative works based upon the :CRQ software or :CueCat reader in whole or part or transmit the :CRQ software over a network or from one computer to another.
[snip]
In any event, you will notify Digital:Convergence of any information derived from reverse engineering or such other activities, and the results thereof will constitute the confidential information of Digital:Convergence that may be used only in connection with the Software and :CueCat reader.
DISCLAIMER: IANAL
This leagalize does give them a leg to stand on. It's a matter of whether a court of law will find it enforcable. I guess it's a lot like the EULA. As long as Radio Shack employees aren't forcing anyone to sign an agreement, I think this license is unenforcable.
-Jennifer
Here are a couple of e-mails I sent. The first was to DigitalConvergence, makers of this toy:
:)
"Our company has received several of your CueCat scanners via Forbes recently and I would like to know whether you would prefer us to return them to you or to Forbes, or to just trash them. While there is some potential value in this device, your company's business practices are offensive enough that we have no desire to use them at this time (re: "Cease and Desist" letters to developers of Linux drivers for your device.) Better luck next time.
Sincerely,
etc etc
Then I sent this one to subscriber@forbes.com:
"Please stop sending the CueCat device to subscribers of Forbes magazine at XYZ Corporation. We find CueCat's business practices deeply offensive and will simply dispose of any such devices which we receive. As subscribers to your magazine, we find your association with these predatory and possibly illegal business practices to be deeply disturbing and we hope that your choice of business partners is merely an temporary aberration, not an indication of future trends. Thank you very much.
Respectfully,
etc etc
Possibly they can be educated, possibly not. But I won't do business with either of them until they demonstrate some enlightenment.
mjs
I never agreed to any such contract. The CDROM (which I hadn't examined until now) says that by opening the software I agree ... I don't agree, so I didn't open the software.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Ummm... I have seen punctuation marks used in other names too: /.
Looks like we have another case of the stupids on our hands.
I can't wait until Burger King starts handing out free toys and then sends cease and decist letters to anybody using it for propping a wobbly table leg.
For crying out loud, this stupid instance will probably make it into court soon just like the stupid DeCSS case.
Why on earth do courts (yes, I know it is not in court yet, I am just proving that I am psychic;-) even bother to hear cases based on this crap?
Visit DC2600
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
If planning to do any progect that may involve upsetting goverment or corporate entities, be sure to host the progect on an odd domain name. At least then while you're dealing with legal hassles, you can still chuckle at pompous beurocrats intoning things like "flying butt monkies".
Exactly. Sega vs. Accolade established that reverse engineering was legal. DMCA says that reverse engineering isn't allowed except for the purpose of interoperability. I don't see libcue as doing anything besides allowing interoperability, so libcue seems to be legal even if DMCA is upheld.
I wouldn't boycott RadioShack. It's not their fault. Lots of people are handing them out. It's Digital Convergence that's the problem. I imagine if you order a reader from DCNV for "shipping costs," you will be bound by their agreement.
See "i-opener" in the archives.
---- ----
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
I've not given in yet. I jsut want to make sure that I don't bury myself deeper later without meaning to...
-M
---- ----
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
I found a perl based cuecat decoder on freshmeat this is NOT a mirror, but at least it's something.
From his page: I'm beginning to think we're headed into a new age where private property is abolished -- but instead of everything being owned by the state, it will be owned by corporations.
I'm sending $100 to the EFF today. This kind of crap has got to stop.
I hope everyone who reads this article (and who can afford it) will join me.
--
My word processor was written by Stanford Professor Donald Knuth. Who wrote yours?
Of course they track what you scan. That's the whole idea of these devices. They aren't just being nice and giving you something. They expect marketing data in return.
They messed up. If you don't install the Digital Convergence software you NEVER agree to any license or agreement. When I got mine from Radio Shack I signed nothing. I also didn't even break a seal to get it out of the bag it came in. I also never installed their software. I'm using the above mentioned software for linux.
:)
Since they can't win this, I hope the linux community keeps writing software for this device and DOES NOT ever go through the Digital Convergence servers. Let's show them what happens when letters like this get thrown around without thinking.
Good luck Digital Convergence.
After the DeCSS case (part 1) it seems obvious that encryption (however weak) may not be broken if only you can pay the lawyers (maybe 'legal encryption' will become more secure than 'quantum encryption' soon, stop all that science at once, maybe we can soon make planes fly by simply forbidding them to land ... oops got sidetracked there) now since the output of their device is 'encrypted' noone may decrypt it without properly licensed decoders.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
I think the OSS implementation should be ported to Windows (just to embarass them further), after the legal hassles are sorted out (I think they really don't have a case).
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
http://blort.org/cuecat/
Happily accepting corrections and additions. :)
--
Translation:
"No sir, I didn't like it."
- Mike
NO!!! Don't boycott!!!
In fact, I plan to become a BETTER Radio Shack customer because of this!
Hell, there are four Radio Shack's I can think of off the top of my head between work and home. I'll be taking the time to stop at EACH ONE on my way home tonite to pick up my free barcode scanner. Hell, I bet Radio Shack's webside has a store locator... the SF Bay Area is SURELY rife with them. I could devote a couple hours over the weekend to picking up as many Cue Cats as I can reach Radio Shacks. Rinse, Lather, Repeat... when a different salesdroid is working the store!
>and make my peers do so as well
Hey! So will I!!!
And mabye I'll tape the wonderous scene of hundreds of CueCats being dumped into the bay!!! Compress to Quicktime, and email to both Radio Shack AND digital convergance!
john
Resistance is NOT futile!!!
Haiku:
I am not a drone.
Remove the collective if
Imagine all the people...
Ya know, I've got an idea...
:Cue:Cat's from every RadioShack and where ever and microwave them... in the bag. And then mail the glowing, chared remains back to Cue (or whom ever) -- postage due of course.
Why not gather up all the
I don't know how much damage that would do to the electronics, but the CD would certainly be a gonner.
If you have some razor/razorblades backend business model then you had beter make sure you have your Linux software ready the same day you ship .... or pissed potential customers will write their own software and in effect hijack your platform ....
In short fuck with their business model ....
My company uses tethered barcode scanners on a regular basis, in fact each of my in-process workstation have one connected. These puppies cost about $300 a pop, connect to PS/2 port and provide a pass-through for standard keyboard attachment to it. What's even better is that the piece of hardware will scan just about any barcode, decode it, and send it as if it were a keyboard input stream ...with a hit to the enter key at the end of the input string.
these have no driver requirements whatsoever
they work on every OS I've tested them on (NT, 9x, *nix/x86)
Why did this CueCat (yup, next is the CueDog right? or CueMouse?) require so much effort to just dump for free into the hands of the end user??? Call me crazy, but if I were going to hand something out for free, I wouldn't devote any time to serious development like a minor encryption scheme... I bet the next version of it is supposed to have an IP address per CueCat.
This kind of thing should be covered under Fair Use. Though I'll lay money (in the hands of EFF) that they'll continue blithely on their prosecution path and try to pull the DMCA down on the developer's head because it defeats a 'digital copy protection' scheme of some format.
If they're angry that they lost money on the development of the device, they have nobody to blame but their own developers and marketers. KIS - Keep It Simple.
If I get my hands on one of these things I do have a door that doesn't like to stay open, sounds like an adequate door stop. Will I get a Cease and Desist order too?
please
zerodvyd
Man! I'm getting so sick of seeing companies put cool technology out there, and then go apeshit when people like it enough to really dig in and play with it. In that sense, this reminds me of the DeCSS case; no one was trying to copy DVDs, they just thought the DVD player was cool and wanted to see how it worked. More complexity to that case, I know, but that seems to be all there is to the CueCat. What possible financial damage could flyingbuttmonkeys (an awesome name, btw) be doing to radio shack?
Mr. Shack: You know, I can't afford to give these things away if people are going to find non-shopping-at-radio-shack
uses for them.
Mr. Cat: No problem. My engineer* assure me that the device can only be used with the custom radio shack software. It
would take an infinite number of hackers on an infinite number of keyboards until the heat death of the universe to reverse
engineer a driver for it.
Mr. Shack: That's a relief. If someone came up with another way to use it, I would have to sue CatCo. out of existence!
Mr. Cat (to self):Oh, sh!t, there is a driver on freshmeat already!
Mr. Cat (to his law firm): You guys are down one client if you can't get that driver erased from the internet!
What do we learn from this? Nothing. We already knew that suits don't understand technology.
*MCSE
I agree. Those things rock! I had to do some maint. programming on an app that used bar code scanners and I thought "wow, this will take a little bit, 'cause I'll have to learn this bar code API or whatever", then I looked through the program for a while and couldn't find anything! That's when I figured it out. What a great solution. You can use it with existing apps! This one scanned multiple items and we just programmed it to send a "tab" character after the scan. It would just jump through the form. Very cool.
---
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
Make sure to send it back postage due too, since they seem to want it so bad make'em pay for it.
-------- This space intentionally left blank --------
1) Sue them seeking a declaratory judgement that you're not infringing on anything.
2) Once you win that, sue them in civil court for harassment.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Alex
To whom it may concern,
I have recently become aware of legal threats being made against Michael Rothwell by the law firm of Kenyon and Kenyon, representing Digital Convergence, makers of the :CueCat bar code scanner available at Radio Shack outlets. As Mr. Rothwell explains on his web page,
http://www.flyingbuttmonkeys.com/useofthingsyouown isnowillegal/
Kenyon & Kenyon has accused him of intellectual property infringement over his distribution of software for the Linux operating system that would interpret the output of a :CueCat scanner in the same manner as the currently (and freely) available software for Windows. This attitude is both misguided, in that the net effect of Mr. Rothwell's work would be increased usage of :CueCat scanners by people who would otherwise by unable to use it, as well as dangerous, in that it stands against the principles of reverse engineering which are a cornerstone of scientific advancement.
I am greatly distressed by the actions taken by Kenyon and Kenyon/Digital Convergence. I would appreciate a statement from Digital Convergence clarifying and explaining your position on the issue.
Thank you for your time,
ardran@hotmail.com
I would like to know what would happen if this code (and others which the US courts have seen fit to ban) is placed on a web site outside the US. US lawyers can send me as many cease and desist letters as they please, I live in Holland.
What I would like to see is an article or interview on how Intellectual Property law is handled across national boundaries. If something is illegal in the US, can we just post the information in Holland, or Thailand, or China, or Hong Kong, or Australia, etc? It seems to me that many of the problems the Open Source community is facing with respect to Copyright, IP, etc, could be resolved by placing the information outside of the jurisdiction of the complaining authority.
Can anyone say data haven?
One of the things which annoys me most about Slashdot is that everyone assumes that the world consists of a) The United States of America b) Canada c) Some other places. Obviously, the US plays a leading role in the software industry, and Slashdot is based in the US. But honestly, go look at a map of the world, you'll find there are actually other countries as well, some of them with their own capital cities and everything! Some of them even have their own legal systems!
David
> Getting a clue?
Yes I am getting the clue that you are trying to draw an unwarrented parallel.
Yes, DVDs can be looked at as a peice of hardware. However thats besides the point. It has nothing to do with the barcode readers whatsoever.
In this case, the barcode reader is akin to the DVD Drive, not the disk (as it is not obtained for the information that it contains, it is a reader of information).
Reverse engineering hardware is, in most places, perfectly legal. Publishing how it works, or releaseing software on how it works is also perfectly legal. At BEST what they have is a "Trade Secret". If a person discoveres their "Trade Secret" without going through improper channels (like a leak within their organization), then they have NO legal resource for protecting it.
There is NO copyright, trademark, or Patent issue here. It is simply an issue of a company that is either A) Clueless about what they really can legally protect. or B) A malicous company that is lieing to people and bluffing legally in an attempt to threaten away developers.
Your attempt to compare it to DVDs is completely foundationless.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
hmmmm ok I can see EULAs for software, its a standard insudtry practice, and there is even law now that makes shrink wrap licences semi-legitimate for scopyrighted works.
However...this is hardware. A Physical device. It is not a copyrighted work. So wouldn't any such type of licence legally require them to go through some measure of proper contract procedure?
Do you have to sign anything to get one of these readers? If they don't make it CLEAR ahead of time, then its their own fault for being stupid.
Personally though, I have to agree, this idea of moving on to a future where corperations own everything and we just licence it, gives me extreme nausea.
I guess its their world, we are just living in it.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Wow, these guys never get tired of trying to maintain the status quo...
I remember someone telling me about how easy it was to rip people off when buying the first electronic goods in North America (way back!). Basically, the public's knowledge level was very low. No-one knew how well these things SHOULD work so they just accepted the low level of usability and the fact that they broke easily.
A few years go by and suddenly people are tinkering and learning about the internals of thier devices (not everyone but a few). Electronic hobbyist magazines became popular and suddenly the quality of manufactured goods started increasing to meet consumer demand. There wasn't much of a monopoly back then (maybe GE? I don't know) so the market really was driven by consumer choice.
As an aside, the same thing seems to be happening in operating systems and software, etc, today...
Anyway, I think it is obvious that when people know how things work they want them to work better, or more efficiently, or they want to change them. Companies normally HATE that! One reason they might is because there may be plans to incorporate "direct buying" into printed material soon (or maybe just consumer tracking) by printing codes in catalogs that are subtly different for different geographic areas or whatever. I don't know, I am just speculating....
It's easy to see how a couple of intelligent, inquisitive people could ruin any chance for these companies to pull things like that on the sly. Thanks guys, we owe you one!
--8<--
--8<--
hmmm ... ( OT alert ) ...
How can H2O-based liquid at 190F cause 3rd degree burns ?
Isn't a 3rd degree burn defined as charred meat ?
I could see blisters ( 2nd degree burns ), but charred
meat from coffee in the crotch seems a bit of a stretch.
just wondering.
-- kjh
In eactly the same fashion, Radioshack gives you a barcode scanner and they expect you to use it on their catalogues and their catalogues only. Nevermind that it could be used elsewhere. You should stop doing it now, and get ANOTHER barcode scanner for that. If cuecat was so unimaginative as to think that are as unimaginative as they are, trying to make a lame business out of these kind of artificial restrictions, they should find something else to do - really.
Also, they apparently mail these things out unsolicited. In the U.S., that makes them a gift, according to Federal law. (39 U.S.C. 3009) The recipient has no obligations regarding unsolicited merchandise. The sender can't even ask for it back.
An even more amusing excercise would be to not print out the list as a big long bar code. Instead, find a series of products whose UPC symbols would, when concatenated, give you the code. It may be necessary to create a simple format conversion system to accomodate the characteristics of the UPC system. Then you can convert DeCSS into a shopping list.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
So where do I get a tee-shirt with the code ???:)
RadioShack is not the problem at all. They just hand them out to people. You can read about my experiences with the CueCat HERE
Sorry about the big pictures, I didnt have time to thumbnail them.
If someone mails you something, unsolicited (even in error) its yours. Those that got them in the mail without asking for one, own the hardware. Federal law says the "hardware license" part of the "contract" is void.
(this got enacted after places started sending people unsolicited "merchandise", followed by a bill. Its very clear now, you mail it to someone without their asking for it, they own it)
I can't comment on the "loan" status for those that asked for one at ratshack.
Organizer:New England Rubbish Deconstruction Society;The NERDS,first US team in the UK Scrapheap Challenge/Junkyard Wars
I'm sure the person that typed up that cease and desist letter kept a straight face.
I can see that conversation:
Law firm: So you want to sue flying butt monkeys?
DC: Yup.
Law firm: Riiiight...
But anyhow, this is just ridiculous, it's a physical product that sends output like a keyboard, basically, it is a keyboard. We can do anything we want to with it. We can destroy it, we can pee on it, we can set it on fire, we can strap gi joes and 74 bottle rockets to it and boldy send it where no cat-shaped bar code reader has gone before. We paid for it (granted it cost $0), it's ours.
The nerve of this company is absolutely absurd. Tonight, I'm going to write as many useless (maybe even useful) programs that use the scanner as I can just to piss them off.
Really, what is the world coming to (or at least the US)? I feel that there's going to have to be a revolution before too long, ya know? Kill all the stupid people!
Mike
"I would kill everyone in this room for a drop of sweet beer."
Now this is just my own guess, but I've noticed many people here asking "why do they care when they're not making a profit anyway?". Here's my theory:
:/
Their software gives their servers the id of both the barcode you scanned, AND the id of your original cuecat. How hard is it to set the server up to remember all these, track people's scanning habbits, even know roughly where you live based on the id their software sends them? Not hard at all! I bet they're collecting massive demographic information about every one of their users, and this linux software is screwing it up for them.
The linux drivers don't send the server your cuecat id, because I assume the author was in the its-none-of-their-damn-business mindset.
Now the product they spent money to give away to the public is no longer collecting all the information they want, which was the whole purpose of giving it away in the first place.
Just my opinion anyway, but I suggest you don't use their software if at all possible, if you're concerned about privacy. Hell, it probably also gives em a good look at the contents of your drive...who knows
--
--
grep "xercist"
it turns out that I used to work for the CEO of digital convergance at an ISP I used to work at, and helped out on his show Net Talk live.. I threw him an email to ask some questions about the actions mentioned here. I'll keep you all posted
So there I was. Naked. In a refrigerator. With a potroast on my knees. Smokin a cigar. That's when it got REALLY weird.
One to be filed in the round file, methinks. A cease-and-desist letter worth paying attention to would have said exactly what IP was being infirnged (clue: none is) and used the words "cease", "desist" and "remove". This is just something threatening dire consequences in unspecific terms.
Charitably, one might assume that they are putting a marker down; they don't know whether they might have a problem with flying butt monkeys, but they do know that if they ever need to prosecute in future, they'd better not be found in proof that they knew about this software for a while, but did nothing about it.
Irritating, perhaps, but part of the price we have to pay for a common-law based system. The alternative would be for there to be government-provided coding licenses and prior restraints of what code you can write.
-- the most controversial site on the Web
I haven't found that guys code but here is a page that is still alive.
~~ What's stopping you?
The Slashdot consensus (worthless in a court of law, I know) is that Digital Convergence doesn't have a leg to stand on. Given that, I'm wondering why you decided to take down the code. Did you talk to a lawyer first? Or does the whole mess just seem too expensive to fight?
I'm not passing judgement on your situation. I don't know your circumstances, so that would be foolish. But it seems to me that the reason why our rights are so often eroded is that we let them be eroded by not defending them vigorously. Here, these lawyers wanted the code taken down and their flimsy letter accomplished it. If they really have no legal leg to stand on (and IANAL, so I don't know), they won with threat and bluster what they couldn't win in court. By letting them get away with it this time, they will be encouraged to pull more of these stunts in the future and we will all be poorer and less free because of it. We need to find ways to (safely) stand up to empty threats and bluster in the future.
The bottom line on this is as follows:
The license agreement for this thing is one of these agreements that says as soon as you use the thing, you agree to the terms of the agreement. It says that they are loaning you the reader, not giving it to you. That might be okay, if they told you ahead of time what you were agreeing to. But they didn't.
It follows that I could:
1. write up an agreement that said "by wearing this baseball cap, you agree to give me $100".
2. casually go up to my friend and say, "hey, I've got this old Mets cap, you want it?"
3. Wait until I see him wearing it one day and then show him the agreement and say, "Dude, you owe me $100! Pay up!"
This kind of bullshit has got to stop.
Don't post on slashdot. Get back to work.
Look at the names on the letterhead. No Kenyons. So . . . Dead lawyers will be suing flying butt monkeys.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
(and, yes, in my email, I am actually using spellcheck. =^)
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
i noticed. still, the tone of the message seemed to indicate that the poster was an ignorant hippy, and not a crafty troll. (speaking from experience with both ;^)
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
As you can see at this page, entitled the actual facts of the mcdonalds coffee case, the coffee was quite overly hot. This is beyond the hot you expect coffee - it was served at between 180 and 190 F (most places serve it at about 140). This was enough to burn through her sweatpants and cause 3rd degree burns to 6% of her body, including some very tender spots. She required $20k in reconstructive plastic surgery. If the coffee was even at 155 F, she would have avoided serious injury. Initially, she asked McD's for just the money to cover the surgery, but when she refused and discovered over 700 claims from between 1980 and 1992, including cases of 3rd degree burns, she did the full-out lawsuit. Also, the jury found her 20% at fault, which is why she only got $160k of the $200k awarded to her. Since that time, the temperature of the coffee at that peticular McD's has been dropped to 158 F.
Just letting 'ya know the facts. =^)
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
Notice it is called the ":Cat" and this translates into "Colon Cat." They certainly are anal...
Andrew Borntreger
Andrew Borntreger
Champion of cinematic disasters
Give 'em the reader back and tell them to go fuck themselves.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
http://www.cuecat.com/faq.html Has a link to their privacy policy. There they admit they collect 'demographic' data and makers of the decode program acknoledge that your 'id' number is sent and can be replaced witha generic code. They dont care about the scanner or the software. They property they are protecting is thier ability to track your internet usage.
...who just love this sort of stuff. I also have a feeler from a few editors.
I'm also preparing pitches to a number of editors, some computer journals, some business magazines, some national newspapers. The story needs to come out.
Dear Sir:
It has come to our attention that you have reverse-engineered the clever encryption scheme used in the branding of our latest technological advance, properly called :CueCat, and posted the brand name in plaintext on your website.
We order you to cease and desist in your devilishly clever reverse-engineering and to post the product's name only in it's encrypted form.
Sincerely,
Digital Convergence
-
-
Give me liberty or give me something of equal or lesser value from your glossy 32-page catalog.
.C3nZC3nZC3nXE3f3Cxv7CNnX.ahb6.fxn2Dx n0.
.C3nZC3nZC3nXE3f3Cxv7CNnX.fHmc.C3r3CNn7CNv2DhT0.
.
3 DNf2C3a.
.C3nZC3nZC3nXE3f3Cxv7CNnX.fHmc.C3TXENnYCNT1CNfZ
and
.C3nZC3nZC3nXE3f3Cxv7CNnX.fGjX.C3r3D3rZE3D
Keeping
I am very interested in your :Cue:Cat bar code scanner and immediately went to Radio Shack to purchase one. They gave me one and I went home and starting using it. I tried to install your software but it asked for too much of my personal information, so I canceled the installation. At no time did I ever agree to any End User License Agreement.
Now, it seems that there is some agreement that I must comply with on your website. I never saw this before I started useing my scanner, does it still apply to me?
My primary operating system, Linux, has some very basic :Cue:Cat support that just recently recieved a Cease and Desist letter from your company. I've already downloaded and currently use this support. Again, does this apply to me?
I am very happy with the :Cue:Cat barcode scanner, but to deny me Linux support seems very detrimental to the wide spread acceptance of this device. You could easily design a Java (or even JavaScript) program that scans barcodes and points people to the proper website. These programs would run on any computer operating system and increase the popularity of the :Cue:Cat.
There is a large market of Linux, and other non-Windows consumers out there. Please try not to offend them or deny them from using this wonderful barcode scanner.
THank you,
***(grammar nazi's identity withheld to protect the innocent)
Keeping
Have you seen the letter paper headers ?
I wonder if they renew it each time staff changes occur...
--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
The cease and desist letter says they're protecting :Cue's "intellectual property". I fail to see how writing an independent program that simply makes use of the output of the :Cue scanner in any way infringes on the company's intellectual property.
Reverse engineering of file formats are the closest example and my understanding is that courts have rules that this is fine.
I don't see how they have a leg to stand on. Hack on...
Sincerely,
Iaal T. Corporate, Esq.
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
When I walked into my local Radio Shack, the guy didn't even know what a CueCat was. I had to say, "You know, the barcode reader?" He acknowledged and handed me the thing. He took my name and address (I still can't figure out why I didn't use fake info). He never said anything about a license to use it. He also never said, on the phone or in person, that it was on loan from DigitalConvergence.com. He said they were "giving" it to me, for free.
After opening the package I plugged the thing into my machine, and glanced at the card they give you. I've just now read the entire card, and it says nothing about a license agreement, or even a mandatory look at crq.com. It only says to go to crq.com to get a unique activation code.
Unfortunately, in screw-you lawyer style, the back of the CD jacket says, in tiny print on the bottom, "Opening of this software constitutes acceptance of our License terms contained herein. Copies can also be found at www.digitalconvergence.com/ula.html. [...]" Although I don't recall a EULA in the package, it does direct you to online information. It also doesn't say installation constitutes acceptance, only opening the software. And that happened when you eagerly ripped open the plastic containing the device.
Therefore, unfortunately, we are all bound by those license terms. I could imagine, if one took it all the way to the Supreme Court, one could claim that decoding the CueCat output is merely reinterpretation of public information (since the CueCat dumps its code into any text editor you choose, they aren't making an effort to conceal the code).
If mine gets recalled, though, I won't give it back. The reason? I paid for it. That's right: when I was at Radio Shack, and before I could even see a hint of a license agreement in the package (the message was obstructed by the informational booklet), I gave away my name and address (it's even printed on the receipt they gave me), which is valuable marketing information. So Radio Shack (and potentially DigitalConvergence.com) can send me shit I don't want, and I have nothing to show for it? I don't think so. I deserve compensation for giving up my privacy.
Maybe that's why I didn't use fake info.
I do not belong in the spam.redirect.de domain.
"You agree to the terms and conditions of this license by performing ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: (1) using the :CRQ software."
I wonder when we'll see THIS EULA posted outside storefronts:
You agree to the terms and conditions of this license by performing ANY OF THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: (1) entering this store.
Required Uses and Restrictions
By entering this store, you agree to purchase a minimum of $1000 US in merchandise in services. You also agree to accept all recommended Extended Warranty Contracts.
Limitation of Liability
(1) If this store collapse, maiming or killing you, this store is not responsible. If poorly placed objects fall from shelves, striking your body, this store is not responsible.
(2) If the employees taunt, ridicule, or insult you, this store is not held responsible. If the employees strike, injure, maim, or kill you, this store is not responsible.
Complete Agreement
This License constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the use of the this.
Governing Law
This agreement shall be construed, interpreted and the rights of the parties determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Our Mind (without reference to its choice of law provisions).
skoda
-----
D. Fischer
ShoutingMan.com
Very good point. It would be cool if you could file with your local court system ONLINE and have the judge email the company and impose a fine for harrassment if that company cannot provide just cause.
I think in the long run, if more power were beheld by the people and used this way, then the companies would certainly rethink their "threat" policies and use them only when they are certain that their product is being abused/pirated.
BR Good AskSlashdot question: "How can we OpenSource the US Justice Department?"
Sig it.
But this business is just stupid. What does this company care? They own the patent on the device and the software is free, right? I don't see how this affects their revenue at all, even if it is illegal, which I doubt. (And before a swarm of people point to the DMCA, I know about that and I still doubt it's illegal.)
I've been working on KDE panel applets lately. Here's a port to add to my list...
---------
One solution would be for anyone who has registered the software and submitied personal information to contact the company and demand that they remove that information. Federal Law says that all personal information about you is your property and must be returned/destroyed at your request (with a few loop-holes for law enforcment, etc) Thats right your medical records, school records, etc are all your property and must be given to you on request. If everyone registers and then demends that there information be removed we can bog down their servers/work force and make them really pay!
___________________
___________________
He who laughs last... Thinks slowest
1. Convert the DeCSS source code to groups of three-number octects (000-255) representing the ASCII characters of the source.
.mp3.
/. users with high UIDs are trolls dammit!
2. For additional fun, before step one, invert the bits of the source code. Claim this is a copyright protection device and nobody can attempt to circumvent it under the DMCA.
3. Use a barcode printer to print out the resulting sequence of numbers in barcode format.
4. Give to a friend.
5. Friend scans barcodes with free scanner and Linux driver.
6. Friend converts source code back into original form, saves it in a file whose name starts with Metallica and ends with
7. Publish the resulting file on Napster, Gnutella, Freenet, etc...
8. Lather, Rinse, Repeat.
.sig: Not all
You can check out the license here. It says that "the CueCat reader distributed under this license is covered by this license."
Well, I got my reader at RS, and no license agreement or coverage was implicitly or explicitly stated, requested, or alluded to regarding opening, installing, or using the device itself. I have not installed or opened the software. (In fact, I've thrown it away, since I had no use for it.) So I would have to say that my device was not distributed under the license, and therefore is not covered by the license.
Does anybody know whether this is sound legal reasoning?
--When you buy proprietary software, you don't get better software. What you get is the right to complain about it.