Slashdot Mirror
Inside the CueCat Hardware
HaveBlue writes "Apparently not content to simply go after those writing software for the CueCat, Digital Convergence is now giving the evil eye to hardware hackers. I just got a letter via FedEx this morning almost exactly like the one sent to Michael Rothwell and other developers. DC just doesn't seem to understand that they can't control hardware that's given away for free..." The second link is an extremely detailed discussion of the internals of the CueCat. Mirror it while you can.
The freemasons figured out the solution to
the scientology lawyer problem a long time
ago. When there secret stuff leaks out, they
have an ages old policy.
"Never Explain. Never Complain."
--chuck
Which violation are you referring to? My misspelling of contend as 'content', not capitalizing 'a' at the beginning of a sentence, or "similar tasks as those" versus "similar tasks to those"?
If he doesn't answer my email because of a grammatical error, that's fine with me. By sending the email I have one more piece of legal defense if they should try to stop me.
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
I still keep hoping to get a free one in the mail. I commute every day with a Postal Inspector, and I'd LOVE to sic him on DC
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
Let's see a copy of that letter, eh? The only links in that post were to other, "similar" letters. If they really are sending letters to people for dinking around with their own hardware, that's a new level of ridiculous. But I'd like to see confirmation of that before I fly off the handle.
These IP lawyers at Kenyon & Kenyon, with offices worldwide, are probably pretty smart dudes. They probably have some idea that it could be postulated that they are threatening people without any good reason.
Can't they be sued for harassment, or wrongful prosecution if they ever did take action on this? What prevents a lawyer from being a hired gun to harass people? - it seems these days that your average slashdot user is running into more and more of these guys/gals.
Can someone make a CueCat icon? I think it deserves its own topic heading now. That way, people can filter it out on their Slashdot prefs, and everyone's happy.
geez, I saw this story the moment it was posted, and his site is already slashdotted. I'm trying to mirror it, without success as of yet. Perhaps someone could email me a big, fat tarball of it?
___________________________
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
anyone remember that suck article from back then claiming geeks don't live in the real world and are forever destined to be defeated by lawyers? When the hell do we get a slashback that tells us the legal situation of everyone involved? (as in, actual legal findings in court, not hemos/tacos expert legal advice)
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
ICQ# 77863057
[o]_O
Version 1 in FORTRAN wasn't quite working out.......
Dirty Pirate Hooker
"DC just doesn't seem to understand that they can't control hardware that's given away for free..."
Apparently they do understand.
Today, I got this response from Charles Richardson of DC.
Dear Wallace,
The Cat is yours to do with as you please. I would suggest that you give it
to a friend if you do not want this for yourself. I'm sorry but we have no
way for you to conveniently return this to us.
At 06:00 PM 9/28/00, you wrote:
>Submitted: 09/28/00 at 06:00 pm:
>====================
>Name: Wallace Lee
>Regarding: tech
>Email: koala@koalaweb.net
>Heard from: magazine
>Which one:
>Comments: Hello,
>I recently received a ":Cue:Cat" device with a magazine subscription.
>I do not agree with your EULA, and I would like to return it to your
>company. Please provide me with shipping instructions, and a prepaid
>shipping container or label. If you can supply me with such an item,
>please e-mail me koala@koalaweb.net. Otherwise, I will destroy the
>:Cue:Cat device or play around with it as I am considering it an
>unsolicited gift.
>
>Thank you,
>WL
>====================
>Browser & Operating System: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.5; Windows 98)
>Remote Host: adsl-63-198-207-97.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (63.198.207.97)
>
>eMphormed(tm) email system v2.0.3 by eMphasys technologies, inc.
> Copyright 1998-2000, All Rights Reserved. For authorized use only.
> http://www.emphasys.net
Wallace J. Lee
"QueCat will be the biggest thing since the mouse." (actual quote)
-CueCat CEO guy.
Mouse - Device that let users manipulate their computer using a graphic user interface, thus omitting the need to type confusing text commands, making the computer a publicly viable resource, changing the world as we know it.
CueCat - Cheap, plastic barcode scanner giving away at now charge, which let's users manipulate their web browser by ommiting the need to type confusing commercial web addresses such as "ford.com" or "disney.com" or the very confusing "go.com" by scanning a barcode on a magizine. Making the computer a viable technological embarressment, changing the world as we know it, and also increasing the number of stolen magazines from doctor's offices.
Conclusion:
Obviously, the CueCat will dominate, being built into the mouse itself. Paraciticly it will slowly take over the mouse and there will be no mouse, instead the user will have to navagate their computer using barcodes from magazines and user manuals.
Say "hello" to CueCat - the future.
Shoot, all you'd have to do is get bar codes from panty hose, barb wire, "C" batteries and tabasco sauce, glue them to the edge of a dinner plate, put the plate on a turn-table and set the CueCat up next to it so it can read the labels as they go by. I can see it now: "Damn, those 27-35 year old engineers are sure buying a lot of panty-hose, barb wire, batteries and hot sauce! Get those advertisers on the phone!"
Yes, actually, that's *exactly* what happens.
Now, with larger chain stores, I bet they now have somewhat centralized databases... however.
Having seen a spanky new IBM POS (point of sale, not that other term) installed in our family owned supermarket.... I know that some employees spent several weeks of large overtime scanning & entering in prices for every single product we carried.
This really is quite easy once the initial push is done.. adding a new item to the store takes only a minute. Of course, adding the first 500 thousand takes considerably longer.
Well, nothing is stopping D:C from sending these letters out, some people just need to get a backbone.
ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
The guy's been around the block. Several times. He knows what's what in intellectual property law. In particular, he should know better than to send cease and desist letters without being specific about just what the infringement is. Doing that pretty much defeats one of the two purposes of sending such a letter: showing the court that you gave the defendant a chance to mend his ways before suing him. That makes winning a case in court quite a bit more difficult.
Rosini, presumably, knows this. That means that he's hiding something: either he's got some new and novel legal theory that he's just waiting to spring on some poor slob who'll be the defendant in a case lawyers will cite for the next 50 years, or else he has no case and is just rattling sabers.
I've set up a mirror of HaveBlue's page at http://www.i-foo.com/cuecat. I await my very own FedEx delivery with bated breath.
--
Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
Silly buggers. If they hadn't posted cease-and-desists, then this story probably wouldn't have made it to /., and I wouldn't have just spent five minutes archiving safely away all the CueCat hacking pages and code archives.
Didn't anyone learn ANYTHING from DeCSS?
> They will be more profitable than most dot.com's
My kid's paper route is more profitable than most dot-coms.
your alergic to white plastic ehh? are you also alergic to the little bit of solder that runs from the board to the little chip with the serialnumber?
...I unscrewed my CueCat a while ago just to see what was in it: One Circuit board with a connector for the "tail". There was also a plastic piece that apparently served no purpose other than to help hold the light steady. Then when I snapped it back together, the little lense that focuses the light onto the sensor came out. So, it's basicly 3 pieces inside -- PC board, plastic retainer, and lens. The sensor is held to the PC board with a strip of copper tape. I did not remove the sensor or the copper tape, because I wanted it to remain intact.
As far as hacking stuff off the PC board goes, it's way beyond me, since there are a lot of tiny surface mount components, and I haven't dabbled with a soldering iron in years.
The lens assembly was intriguing. It got me thinking that perhaps you could turn this thing into a scanner that could scan more than barcodes. Maybe it could even scan text. Maybe somebody else can provide some insight as to whether or not retrofitting a bar code scanner to scan in 2-dimensions is practical or not.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Why?
First, they changed the EULA when this stuff started happening. People were getting CueCats, and tinkering with them, and posting their findings. DC went apeshit, and modified their EULA to say "Well, we really didn't give it to you. It's on LOAN to you, and we can take it back whenever we please."
That doesn't work either. I dare them to try to "recall" my scanner. I have a legitimate receipt of purchase from Radio Shack that clearly lists the CueCat Scanner, as well as a barcoded catalog. Everyone should have gotten one of these receipts. The purchase price is $0.00, but so what? It's still a legal purchase, and I have my receipt to prove it. So if DC claims that these scanners are on LOAN, that would mean that Radio Shack is dealing in stolen merchandise.
Sounds like DC should be butting heads with Radio Shack's lawyers, and not the end users.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
"New York, Sept. 28, 2000
Digital Convergence, a firm specializing in the manufacture and distribution of 'barcode' scanners called the "Cue Cat", has sent out cease and decist letters to the manufacturers of convinience and grocery store equipment. A 'barcode' is a series of parallel lines of various thickness that Digital Convergence has developed for the use of uniquely identifying an item.
"We have spent five years coming up with the idea of letting people identify an item by a 'bar code' printed on it", said the company's Vice President of Technology, "And now, these costly years of research are in danger of being wasted because of all these companies trying to profit from our great idea"
The official further noted that by allowing the scanning of these 'barcodes' by third party hardware, the manufacturers of these machines are effectively undermining Digital Convergence's revenue stream, and "stealing away [our] market share".
No comment could be obtained from the companies that received the Cease and Desist letters, and no request for an interview was answered by press time."
Ñ'
1) Wouldn't get them far in business if theyt did not conform to the standards.
2) Aren't barcodes somewhat patented, and licensed to a degree? Not in an exploitive manner, but I believe the patent holders use this to make sure the system doesn't fail?
Thanks for reminding me of that. Maybe I can take advantage of the large donations I give my congressbeing to get the CueCat info put in the Congressional Record. May as well add DeCSS while I'm about it ... :-)
Where's a bowl of hot grits when you want to use something for other than it's intended purpose...
--
Chief Frog Inspector
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Have a take, don't suck, or don't talk to me.
Just a friendly tip!
I posted this earlier and it got eaten. Anyway, here are *TWO* ideas for screwing Digital Convergence:
Idea #1: Digital Convergence just announced an IPO. We can do our part on internet investment discussion boards to make sure that their potential investors are well-informed about this company... every day until the IPO!
Be sure to relay only FACTS on internet discussion boards-- that will suffice. Of course, wouldn't it be a shame if frank and extensive discussion of these facts cut a few percent off their $100 million IPO?
Idea #2: Since Digital Convergence plans to build a database of demographic data, how about a little program that pulls random items out of the UBC database, encodes them, and ships them off to the DC servers every couple minutes? This would irreparably corrupt their database, making it worthless-- weeding out fake scans would be essentially impossible. If you're worried about legality, print out 10 pages of barcodes for obscure items you'd never own or desire and scan them again and again whenever you have an idly thinking about something else. That way, you're using their product exactly as intended, yet still corrupting their database. What can they do?
Does anyone else think that if Digital Submergence would ignore all this activity, there'd be a lot less interest in it? Just the fact that they're blanketing the hacker community with their "cease and desist"s is getting my back up enough to put up a mirror site myself. Their struggles are just attracting more sharks, in my estimation. Anyway, when the CueCat becomes the obvious failure that is its destiny, DC isn't going to have any money left to pay a law firm to harrass a bunch of hobbyists, so this is a short-term problem for the tinkerers, in my opinion.
IANAL, so I would appreciate it if anyone with substantial relevant expertise could tell us:
- Are these actions of Digital Convergence perhaps in violation of the First Amendment?
- If so, is there a possibility of certifying a suit against Digital Convergence as a class action?
- Are there any statutory damages we could expect, or just a "cease and desist"? I know it would be nice to just take a company with a stupid legal-driven business plan and get them to shut up, but driving them out of business for trying to mess with people's free speech rights would be much harder for the rest of the business community to ignore.
Just my ruminations...--
Build a man a fire, and he's warm for a day.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
To whom it may concern,
Our clients, the slashdot communicty, have recently made it clear to us that your firm has been partcipating in an unjustified harassment campaign against developers of open source CueCat software on behalf of your client, Digital Convergance. Despite repeated requests for clarification from the recipients of your requests, your firm has seen fit to persist with its harassment of developers working on legitimate hardware and software development.
This letter is being provided to inform you that persuant to section 53, paragraph 12 of the State of Ohio Revised code, you are hereby ordered to cease and desist all actions against the forementioned developers until such time as a complete list of specific grievances can be included with your request. Failure to comply will result in the filing of a civil lawsuit against your firm, digital convergance, and its partners.
Thank you,
Scott F. Crosby
Will that do?
-- Minds are like parachutes... they work best when open.
As has been explained multiple times before...
In a contractual transaction, the receiving party has to be given an opportunity to read and understand and agree to a contract (which is what a license agreement is) in order for it to be binding. I've gotten two of these little scanners so far, and neither has come with any kind of license agreement that I could see. There might have been something on the CDs, but I didn't need them, so I pitched them. There certainly wasn't anything on the package telling me that the hardware was being given to me under terms of any kind of contract or license.
Therefore, it appears that there is no contract is in force between Digital Convergence and myself. Any hardware that was given to me freely, with no conditions stated, is mine to do with AS I WILL, provided I don't violate anybody's copyrights or patents. (Copyrights and patents are binding on me no matter if I've signed a contract or not. There is no doubt a copyright on any microcode contained in the processor of the bar code reader, but I'm not attempting to do anything with that code, so I'm OK there. There have been no indications of patent violations, so I'll continue to do as I please until notified that I'm violating a patent. Note that this is different from a trade secret, which requires a contract between the secret owner and other parties. Without a signed contract, I'm under no obligation to keep private any trade secrets that may belong to Digital Convergence.)
I also understand that there might be something on a web site somewhere that talks about restricting what I can do with something that was given to me freely. Since I have not had the opportunity or desire or obligation to go to the web site, any words there are hearsay as far as I'm concerned, which also means they have no legal affect on me. It's also hard to see how terms could be imposed ex post facto, and I believe a court would agree.
So. License? What license?
obDisclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
...phil
...phil
"For a list of the ways which technology has failed to improve our quality of life, press 3."
I remember a story from a few years ago, possibly apocryphal. There was a bungee tower operator, and he went to the top of his tower to make a test jump. Apparently he first checked to make sure that the cord was securely fastened to the top of the tower, and did a back-dive off the tower.
... presumably the point that he realized his error.
Unfortunately, he had neglected to attach the other end of the bungee cord to his legs.
He apparently started screaming about halfway down
Evolution in action.
Here we have the corporate equivalent. In order for DC's business model to work, they needed to ensure that no one else could write software to use their hardware. Their entire business model is based on funnelling all cuecat scans through their web site. If you can use a cuecat without going through their web site, then their business model is destroyed.
Unfortunately, they failed to do that. They used a primitive algorithm, and they made the slightly scrambled string print out in a DOS window, making it extra simple to figure out. They have NO patents that cover use of the hardware, and all of their copyrights only apply to their software, which you don't need to install to use the cuecat. Their "trade secret" was easily reverse-engineered, which is completely legal.
The reason that their vague lawyer-letters don't actually specify any specific intellectual property violation, and the reason why people are receiving vague letters instead of cease and desist letters is quite simple.
They forgot to attach the bungee cord to their legs.
Those letters are the screaming.
Evolution in action.
It seems to me the author has been threatened that he will be sued for IP violations, and that penalties will accrue the longer he leaves the material up.
He then asked for clarification; that is, what exactly is illegal on the site and what laws were being violated.
K & K did not provide the information.
Therefore, it seems to me that any accrual of financial penalties has now become their burden, for failing to provide the information necessary for the flyingbuttmonkey to determine how best to serve their viewing public.
Anyway, IANAL. Everyone compares computer hardware to cars, and the "welded hood" analogy. It seems to fall apart when you get into these "give away the razor, and make you're money selling blades".
Have any aftermarket car companies been sued for making GM/FORD/HONDA/TOYO replacement parts? Shocks, Tires, Wheels, pistons, etc? What laws let someone take their car apart and posting dimensions of the piston, for example?
Also, Steve Ciarcia (former Byte Magazine/Circuit Cellar guru) ran a lengthy series on the design and programming of barcode readers.
Sheesh, only a small percentage of people getting this thing are going to hack it, anyway. All Digital Divergence is doing is screwing their image with the computing elite. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
(copied directly from the US Postal service publication 201, Consumer's Guide to Postal Services & Products, available from the USPS at http://www.usps.com)
Unsolicited Merchandise
Federal law prohibits the shipment of
unordered merchandise. Such a practice
may constitute an unfair trade practice.
Merchandise mailed in violation of United
States Code may be treated as a gift by the
recipient without any obligation to the
sender. The laws governing this practice are
enforced by the Federal Trade Commission.
If you believe that you have received unor-dered
merchandise in violation of federal
law, contact the Commission's Bureau of
Consumer Protection at:
BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON DC 20580-0001
(emphasis added was mine. Digital Convergence has no case)
Someone could sue DC to get a declaratory judgment that it is okay to reverse engineer and write software for the CueCat. The complaint would look something like this:
1. The CueCat is a bar code reader (explain it).
2. I would like to reverse engineer the CueCat and write software to intercept the data (explain how).
3. DC is sending out vague cease and desist letters (attach an example).
4. On information and belief, DC has no patent on the CueCat.
Then move for summary judgment asking the judge to rule that there are no patent or copyright rights in the CueCat and that you can reverse engineer it. The plaintiff wins (without having exposed himself to risk). Now, everyone can point DC to a legal decision.
And what exactly does the license agreement have to do with anything? There is no evidence that any of the people getting the letters have installed or are using the software. Hence, the license agreement has no relevance whatsoever. Many of the cuecats were sent out as gifts via the post office. Attempting to attach a license onto these gifts is actually a violation of federal law. In my case, I went to RatShack and asked for one. I was never asked to sign anything, nor asked for my name. The clerk simply handed it to me.
At what point do you think any of us entered into a contract with Digital Convergence? That's what a license agreement is: a contract. Did people enter into a contract simply by removing the package from their mailbox? Did they enter into a contract by opening the package? Did I enter into a contract by asking the RatShack clerk for a free scanner? Did I enter into a contract when he handed me the bag? I was never asked for my name, and certainly never signed anything. None of us have installed or used the software. Why bother? If the license agreement said everybody born in odd years owes Digital Convergence a dollar, would that mean I owe them a dollar? Of course not.
So why exactly are any of us bound by the license agreement on the software? Did I enter into a contract when you read the license agreement? The simple fact of the matter is these lawyers are sending out scary-sounding but completely worthless letters. I don't think they even qualify as a cease and desist letter. There is no IP infringement going on. The lawyers know that. They are just hoping that they can scare everyone with their worthless threats.
These popped up with a trip to Google:
Student's electrial engineering project, includes schematic (scanner + RS232 interface)
And another.
Can't be too hard to do anyway; just need an IR LED, IR phototransistor positioned to pick up the reflections, clean the signal up into digital and stuff it into a computer for processing.
Or the software way, if you've got a decent enough quality webcam, write some image recognition stuff to read the barcode off frame grabs.
I think that DC may have hit on something here.
1. Put out a lame device that's easy to take apart.
2. Record all such instances of "violations of IP".
3. Allow the "damages" to accrue.
4. Sue the IP violators for millions.
5. Patent the process and license it to other companies.
They will be more profitable than most dot.com's
Ralph
Absolutely.. only I think they need an icon a la The Microsoft
Bill Gates of Borg one.. Only instead it's a mouse with a red laser/LED eye
It's not trivial, but there is enough information out there that a suitably proficient hobbyist could do it. I would if I had time.
:-)
If anyone REALLY wants this done, perhaps you can motivate me. Email me and ask me to do it. Send me money, a used laptop, or some other motivator.
-Adam
My website (electronics, PIC uControllers, etc)
can any hardware engineers out there write up a quick and dirty on how to build your own bar-code scanner? then you could base any of your software engineering on hardware you'd created yourself.
let's see em sue you for that.
p.s. since it's legal to send a cease and desist letter for anything, can we get a slash lawyer to write a cease-and-desist letter to DC that asks them to cease and desist being assholes? Then all of us can mail them a copy...
--
What happens when you outlaw guns
Just because you have a business plan doesn't mean you're entitled to make money off of said business plan, particularly if it's a stupid business plan.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
Several of us at work here decided to write a little VB app that can catalog just about anything using the cue cat. We have not used any of the original code from cuecat, just the un-modified hardware. Are we going to get a rectal examination if we release this as freeware? what have we come to..........
Dirty Pirate Hooker
..or are these people doing this just to make a joke of RIAA and MPAA?
Their case against people is so absurd, it almost seems like the whole CueCat thing came about to get the chance to prove in a court that, in the computer industry, IP means a very different thing than it used to.
I mean, even the timing of these guys is perfect to poke fun at the mp3 and DeCSS debate.
#include <stdIANAL.h>
And with that in mind.. would it be worth it to hurry up and push CueCat into a court so a precedent could be set? It'd be amusing to watch these guys lose. Then, turn around and use that against RIAA or MPAA.
What is going to happen if somebody creates a mirror of these sites in a server operating outside the jurorsdiction of a USA court. What are DC supposed to do then? It is not a rocket science this bar code reader. Why making so much noise about this "technology"?! And how they imagine to stop all the web sites that can appear outside USA, if somebody decides to do this? Another question is: What is the harm to their technology if occasionaly I use the their bar code reader .... like a bar code reader?
Signal 11 is funny. I like his humor. Unfortunately, what this story is about... is not funny. As such, I'm hoping a moderater will see this here.
.sig contains the mirrors of lots of things. Click it.
mirror of the hardware site
My
-----
The Uniform Code Council assigns the company codes on the UPC. The first part of the code is unique to the company manufacturing the product. The end of the code is determined by the company. Therefore, there shouldn't be any duplicate bar codes (unless the same company produced both or someone created unauthorized codes).
Want a UPC code of your own? Check out The Uniform Code Council's instructions.
Wonder if there is any law against creating a clone of the Cue Cat, the case seems small enough that the hardware wouldn't be too hard to duplicate, possibly using larger components.
"Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gautier
err, s/mouse/cat/. Long day...
- Go down to Radio Shack,
- Pick up a CueCat and lie about their name and address, and
- Either never use it with the Windoze client, hack the EEPROM before doing anything with it, or both.
All of these people are going to give DC no revenue for their outlay. The publicity alone has given DC a huge hit in their current expenses and future revenue, and frankly they're a bunch of morons to have bet their business on such a lousy business plan.Let me predict the next cycle of the arms race.
- DC produces a new version of the scanner which truly encrypts the scan output, and fails to operate if the EEPROM is disconnected or altered.
- Some embedded hacker (like, maybe, me?) writes some code for a pin-compatible microcontroller to make their new scanner produce the same output (for ISBN, UPC, etc. codes) as the old CueCat... only without the serialization. Said code is distributed for free, or you can buy a pre-programmed microcontroller for a few bucks and an SASE.
Either way, Digital Convergence can kiss its corporate ass goodbye.--
Build a man a fire, and he's warm for a day.
Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
Hal Duston
hald@sound.net
"
Hello,
I'm Ben Blonkey, inventer of the cue cat. I'm sorry, but talking about the cue cat is now illegal. Everyone who replies will now be scouted out by the cue cat mafia and sent a letter from fed-ex.
Thank You,
Cue Cat Inc.
"
I mean really what are we going to do, switch to one of the other bar code readers? Of course not, but we've all gone out and got a CueCat!
Whoever put together this plan has got to be sitting in his chair rocking back and forth laughing his butt off at how we fell for it hook, line and sinker! All the while churning out invoices to the CueCat enabled advertisors who signed deals at a rate of .10 per shipped CueCat for the right to use that TMed slanty barcode and logo!
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to find out Taco was a principle over at DC!
I would never take apart a device I was given...That's bad. What's wrong with you nasty 'hackers'?!
--K
Ok, I said it. Now where's my $50?
---
-----
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 17:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kevin Fox
To: jrosini@kenyon.com
Subject: Cuecat violations
Dear Mr. Rosini,
As the owner of a Cuecat scanner and someone who knows a fair amount about
intellectual property law, I would like to know Kenyon & Kenyon's position
regarding what you term infringing use of Cuecat scanners.
Which intellectual property laws specifically do you content that users
are infringing upon? are users infringing on trade secrecy, patent,
trademark, or copyright violations?
Speaking as someone who is planning on performing similar tasks as those
you found infringing when enacted by 'flyingbuttmonkeys.com' I would like
to know cuecat's specific legal position on this matter.
Thank you for your attention in this matter. I eagerly await your reply.
Sincerely,
Kevin Fox
Fury.com
-------
If I get a reply, I'll post it here.
Kevin Fox
Kevin Fox
Since RadioShack is giving them away for free. Why not just go pick up one per day from all surrounding stores. You can just give false name and stuff if you want, but this is one easy way to screw up their business model. All their investor will see they gave away 100 thousands of CueCats, but where are all the demographic info from all those alledge users... LOL And since the CueCat comes in a plastic baggie, why not toss out the CD ROM and pamplet that came with it, since the EULA is for the Software, if we don't use the software, we're not breaking any EULA rules. "And what EULA Agreement and pamplet are you talking about, we only received a CueCat thing in a ripped plastic baggies." :)
Well, it seems that some people will never learn one of the most basic rules of the net: more you fight, more mirrors will pop up. $cientology was the first organisation to have this experience, I guess their "secrets" documents are the most widely spread religious documents in the net (I guess somebody should submit these cuecat-documents to the Swedish parlament :-)... Anyone who has followed how the community works here should have learned the lesson up till now so it's a bit strange that it still happens.
Anyway, feel free to visit also my mirror, the address is the same as below...
Ville
My DeCSS archive:
I've taunted the RIAA, the MPAA, I've denounced the christian coalition, NOW (national organization of women), and I have yet to receive a single letter of reprisal.
Hmmm. Interesting.
Watch for a page soon that taunts mad pit bulls with RIAA-approved Christian Coalition cease-and-letters to NOW for hacking the CueCat with the help of the MPAA to secretly send information to Digital Convergence about anti-feminist movies from open-source MPEG4-based DVD-ripper programs powered by DeCSS.
That should stir up a nicely amusing unholy mess, not to mention a very confusing one.
A truly excellent pizza parlor is a delight unto the heavens. Treasure the sauce and the toppings!
We took the CueCat and a sampling of posts to the Intellectual Property Section of the Arizona State Bar, and when we read the "retroactive loan" EULA and Slashdot posts, raucous laughter ensued... they especially enjoyed the post on the toothbrush EULA.
Digital Convergence
I knew this was coming... I'm beyond glad I printed the page out a few days ago. I was really surprised they hadn't gotten a letter yet.
I think DC can make an argument that the software violates their IP (whatever that is, and however weak their argument is... i think they can make one). Now... I don't see anythign wrong with the hardware side of it.
I got my Cue:;'#$.,==+Cat before they changed their EULA, and since RS didn't get my name and address I feel I have no obligation to any changes they make. So, therefore...I can do with this little piece of hardware as I please. It just so happens I'm allergic to white plastic...so to use their wonderful product I removed it from its casing.
You know...whatever. If they want to waste their money on Legal crap that no one cares about, let them. Are we REALLY worth it? I mean, seriously. How many people have taken theirs apart? Is it worth the cost of all this trouble and bad publicity on their part?
---