Slashdot Mirror


FOSS Application Under Attack by Makers of KaZaa

Famatra writes "A story from Zeropaid indicates that maker of KaZaA, Sharman Networks, has sent a Cease and Desist Letter to the maker of KCEasy because it interoperates with their FastTrack network. The creator of KCeasy says on the KCEasy website "I feel that inclusion of FastTrack access with KCeasy is not worth a legal battle between Sharman and myself". A similar issue was covered by the Slashdot story Fight On Blizzard Vs. Bnetd Case on the right to reverse engineer to create an interoperable network. Reverse engineering to be another on the list of rights that have fallen by the wayside?"

17 of 300 comments (clear)

  1. Someone failed Sesame Street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The issue with bnetd is not "similar", except in extremely broad terms. The issue at hand wasn't hopping onto the Battle.net network, it was making their OWN network that used a reverse-engineered Battle.net engine.

    Not only that, bnetd allowed people to bypass blizzard's CD-key check, which was bad sauce. So this guy's inclusion of FastTrack operability is allowing people to steal the chance to steal software/music? And what about KaZaA-lite? This makes my brain hurt.

    Reverse-engineering may have fallen by the wayside, but it has next to nothing to do with f'n bnetd. Submitter must be applying to be a /. editor.

    1. Re:Someone failed Sesame Street by Ark42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can play any game you want over the internet if it supports a LAN mode: http://www.morpheussoftware.net/git/

  2. KCEasy is just a front-end by untermensch · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sharman Networks, has sent a Cease and Desist Letter to the maker of KCEasy because it interoperates with their FastTrack network.

    I'm a bit suprised that the KCEasy authors have complied with the cease-and-desist this easily, since the above statement is not really true.

    KCEasy is simply a front-end. KCEasy makes use of giFT, which is an interface program, connecting one or more front-ends to one or more protocol plug-ins. giFT then in turn makes use of the giFT-FastTrack plugin which actually communicates on the FastTrack network.

    Anway, those of you using KCEasy might want to look into some of the other giFT front-ends, I don't know of any others for windows offhand but I'm guessing they are out there.

    Googling for giFTcurs, appolon, giftui will bring up some for *NIX.

    1. Re:KCEasy is just a front-end by twitchkat · · Score: 5, Informative
      KCEasy is simply a front-end. KCEasy makes use of giFT

      KCEasy may be just a front-end, but it is a front-end developed by one of the guys heavily involved in reverse-engineering the KaZaA encryption algorithms (eg, /src/crypt/enc_type_*.c) for the giFT-fasttrack plug-in: mkern.

      See:

      http://cvs.berlios.de/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/gift-fas ttrack/giFT-FastTrack/src/crypt/

      Maybe the KaZaA people are miffed at his reverse-engineering ways and chose to attack here rather than at the gift-fasttrack plug-in level?

    2. Re:KCEasy is just a front-end by oddfox · · Score: 2, Informative

      KCEasy bundles all of giFT and makes it much easier to get online using OpenFT, Gnutella, and up until a few days ago FastTrack. I don't know of any other Windows client that made it as easy as installing the program and everything works like a charm out of the package. It took me about 15 minutes to setup Apollon in Linux, and I never did figure out giFToxic.

      I believe KCEasy is open sourced, so it wouldn't be that hard to create a modified version that has FastTrack support and was distributed via Gnutella or maybe ed2k network. Bittorrent, even? Meh.

      --
      "We invented personal computing." - Bill Gates
  3. Latest threat to P2P comes from within by Sanity · · Score: 5, Informative
    This is just one example of the increasing threat that Kazaa, or more precicely the companies around it, pose to innovation in the P2P space.

    Perhaps the best example is their aquisition of patent #5,978,791, filed in 1997, which claims to cover the retrieval of a file across a network using a hash of the file's contents.

    Set aside, for a moment, that this technique is completley obvious and has been around for decades (the earliest reference I can find is the Xanadu project from the early 90s - but I haven't looked very hard), and consider the fact that these guys could use this patent to effectively shut down almost anyone that comes up with a P2P app that doesn't have the funding to fight them in court (since most if not all modern P2P apps use this technique).

    The bottom line is that companies such as Brilliant Digital Entertainment (the same nice people that were behind the adware that Kazaa is now famous for) are almost as much a threat to P2P as the better known people everybody loves to hate.

    If anyone is interested, here is a more detailed article I wrote on the subject.

  4. Kazaa Lite Resurrection by Johnny+Doughnuts · · Score: 3, Informative

    Kazaa Lite Resurrection. Basically a continuation of the KL project. If you MUST use Kazaa, use this.

    http://mxp2.free.fr/P2P/KLR007.exe

  5. giftd goes too... by someguy456 · · Score: 2, Informative

    For those of you unfamiliar with Kceasy, or windows in general, KCeasy is only a client for the giFT server http://gift.sourceforge.net/ . However, an additional plugin is required to access the Fasttrack network (Kazaa). Thus, I think that only the development of this plugin will cease, and that giFT and KCeasy will live.

  6. Re:Reverse engineering and open source by BdosError · · Score: 2, Informative
    Having the "trick" known is not a defense for violating a patent. In fact once the patent is granted, the trick is known because the patent is published. Having the information known to others is only a valid (legal) reason for disallowing protection of a trade secret.

    Putting "the genie back in the bottle" is not something the patent holder is requried to do, it's simply a practical measure, but that's where the lawsuits come in.</IANAL>

    --
    Complexity is Easy. Simplicity is Hard.
  7. Reverse Engineering . . . legal by StateOfTheUnion · · Score: 3, Informative
    Reverse engineering is legal; right is an awfully strong term to apply to it . . . but correct (IANAL . . . standard disclaimers apply). Nolo has an article on trade secrets that discusses reverse engineering. Quoted:

    There is one group of people that cannot be stopped from using information protected under trade secret law. These are people who discover the secret independently, that is, without using illegal means or violating agreements or state laws. For example, it is not a violation of trade secret law to analyze (or "reverse engineer") any lawfully obtained product and determine its trade secret.

    EXAMPLE

    XCEL glue is comprised of a trade secret protected formula. Phil, a chemist, analyzes the contents of XCEL glue, determines its composition and recreates the formula. Phil can legally use this information to make and sell his own glue.

  8. Re:reverse engineering a right? by MathFox · · Score: 4, Informative
    In the Netherlands it is legal (under certain conditions) to reverse engineer a program "to create an interoperable program". I have all reasons to believe Markus Kern when he sais that his reverse engineering of the Kazaa network is legal in Germany.

    The law in the USA is quite different in this respect and it could be that you'll be fried when attempting such a thing there. (Jon Johansen was acquitted in Norway for DeCSS, while those in the US that only linked to it were convicted.)

    IANAL, if you want to try this at home see one (a lawyer) first.

    --
    extern warranty;
    main()
    {
    (void)warranty;
    }
  9. too bad for Kazaa by sir_cello · · Score: 2, Informative


    Most laws on copyright (e.g. in the UK the CDPA 1988) have _actual_ statutory provisions that allow reverse engineering for interoperability purposes. Of course, as was seen with IM systems, this rapidly becomes an arms race. Kazaa may have sent a C&D, but my strong belief is that it would not be enforceable.

    The question is whether the guy who received it understands his rights or is just going to let himself be brow-beat.

  10. Re:Reverse engineering and open source by StateOfTheUnion · · Score: 2, Informative
    Actually, Patent holders probably don't care too much about reverse engineering because their invention is disclosed and open to review in the patent application. They cannot keep the functionality secret or legally they wouldn't get a patent. The patent gives them monopolistic protection for a limited period of time in exchange for disclosing the "secrets" of their invention.

    (Disclaimer: This only applies when the patent process works the way it was intended . . . the silly patents of late may not apply)

  11. Reverse Engineering is legal, but not access by EaglesNest · · Score: 5, Informative
    Under U.S. Copyright law, fair use allows reverse engineering of funcational components because they are ideas (or facts) not expression. However, a provisions from our friend the DMCA (17 U.S.C. 1201) makes it illegal to bypass an overt technological protection that restricts (a) access or (b) protects the rights of the author. Think of this as breaking open a safe (illegal) to get to something inside that you're allowed to copy (legal).

    As for intruding on a private network, the network is composed primarily of users, if I'm not mistaken. Still, companies like E-bay have been successful in using trespass (to chattles) to keep people off their servers if they make it clear that they don't want them on there.

  12. Fork KCeasy then wait? by Famatra · · Score: 2, Informative

    "I feel that inclusion of FastTrack access with KCeasy is not worth a legal battle between Sharman and myself"

    Couldn't someone, who is willing to fight Sharman Networks, fork KCeasy and then await another letter? Also if you want, you can still access the fasttrack network with a previous version here (0.11) I think it was 0.12 that was nerfed.

  13. Re:Reverse Engineering: A right? In danger? Huh? by codemachine · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nope, Kazaa is fully decentralized. They wouldn't want to run any services themselves, since that would line them up for a quick legal defeat, much like Napster. If they are running any services on their own machines, they certainly wouldn't admit it.

    It is just finding a node to connect to that is hard to do without centralization, and as I recall, the client comes with a list of IPs to try first. If for some reason none of those IPs are running Kazaa, it starts scanning the 24.* domain (the cable internet providers) until it finds someone. There is no central server telling you where to find peers or super-nodes, and all routing of searches is done through super-nodes.

  14. Re:I think we all recognize by tabdelgawad · · Score: 2, Informative

    This *is* funny, but true as well. Few seem to have noticed that KaZaA is countersuing the music industry for 'hacking' into their network using an 'illegal' client. See here:

    http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/09/24/kazaa .s ues.ap/

    This coincided with the time Sharman cracked down on Kazaa Lite. I think they have to continue to crack down on unauthorized clients if they want to have a leg to stand on in court.

    --
    Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.