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?"
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.
/. editor.
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
QUOTE: "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?"
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the issue at question here is not whether or not it is legal to reverse engineer the KaZaA network and create an interoperable network, but rather the right to reverse engineer the KaZaA network and provide unlicensed access to the existing network. A subtle, but important distinction.
To draw an analogy, if I create a network of systems that does something, then (as I understand it) it is perfectly legal for you to reverse engineer my methodology and create a competing network that works in a similar way (within the constraints of patents, of course... and the act of reverse engineering something legally is a fairly complex one.) However, it would NOT (nessesarily, depending on the access license for my network) be legal for you to reverse-engineer an unlicensed client that accesses my network. In other words, it's not the act of reverse engineering that's illegal, but rather connecting your client to MY network.
However, in the case of a pure P2P system, I'm not sure that argument will hold up. This would have been an interesting one to watch. Too bad KCEasy backed down so easily.
Also, to be clear, I don't consider reverse engineering to be "a right" as the poster does. Just because something is not illegal doesn't make it a right. Free speech is a right. Free press is a right. Reverse engineering (within certain constraints) is simply legal.
--- JRJ
jrjBlog
what does this mean for the poisoned project?
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.
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.
That the developers of Kazaa are strict believers in tough copyright law. This is simply an extension of that view.
and here i was under the assumption that it was (technically) illegal. anyone care to fill in the gaps for me?
Kazaa Lite Resurrection. Basically a continuation of the KL project. If you MUST use Kazaa, use this.
http://mxp2.free.fr/P2P/KLR007.exe
Kazaa sends a cease and desist letter to YOU!
Their whole legal strategy rests on hopping shell companies. If they stood still enough to sue somebody, the RIAA and MPAA could come down on em like a ton o bricks.
Test your net with Netalyzr
It might make sense (for patent holders) to make reverse engineering illegal. But open source seems to nullify this tactic. After all, once the trick behind the invention is discovered, and published, one cannot really "put the genie back in the bottle," so to speak.
Sounds like Kazaa is fighting the same sort of thing for the same sort of reason except that in the case of chat, one must connect to the central servers of the chat netowrk. Can Kazaa really claim ownership-like rights to a network that doesn't depend on their servers for functionality? It would seem that Kazaa has created a Frankenstein monster . . . that perhaps they cannot wholly control . . .
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.
Robert Bindler
A Computer Science student's views on technology.
Wouldn't that be lovely?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Quick! Download KCEasy off of Kazaa while you can!
Let's be clear about the importance of reverse engineering. Were it not for that, if you own a Compaq today, you wouldn't. They reverse engineered the IBM PC BIOS chip way back when, and created the first PC clones. Reverse engineering is a fact, not something that should be made "illegal". Essentially every tire maker has reverse engineered the design of the tire from the first automobile tires, etc. I would argue that nearly all engineering is in some way reverse engineering, and as such, we should be very careful to preserve our freedom to go backwards around stuff... more examples? How about the 900 "Super soaker" knockoffs, despite the original having 10+ patent #'s printed on the plastic device itself? Ever see how many patents are on the cellphone? Yet many companies reverse engineer each other's technologies, and no one really cares -- competition is supposed to be healthy. I don't mean stealing their secrets or making fake Louis Vuitton bags, I mean how the Dooney & Bourke bag looks "interestingly similar" to the LV bag.
stuff |
Did you miss the introduction of MS Messenger and pissing the contest that resulted between AOL and Microsoft over Messenger logging on to the AIM network? The major IM services have routinely blocked third party clients since then, with the client developers working around the blocks.
if it's their network, anyone not authorized to use it would be in violation, yes? this is why I think BitTorrent is the wave of the future, no special networks used, just those that participate either by dnlding or uplding. Here it just seems to be this cut/dry issue of fair use. Am I missing something?
POCB
free ipod and free gmail!
We loose rights when copyrights are extended indefinately.
Even when they fail to purchase such legislation, we loose our rights when we don't have the resources to fight them in court.
The courtsystem is extremely weighted in favour of the party with the most money.
Do I have a solution? No. But the problem exists.
Liberty.
While I agree that the Bnetd issue was fairly lame, this one is more in a gray area. The FastTrack clients dont run on an independant network, and KCeasys interoperability with the FastTrack network means interacting with Sharman Networks servers to auth the user and provide various other facilities while the Bnetd solution produced a fully independant network, where people could join without any interaction with Blizzards servers at all, and that is the major difference in this case.
I dont think "Reverse engineering to be another on the list of rights that have fallen by the wayside?" is a valid concern here, because the main issue seems to be that KCeasy interacts with SN servers, in a way that SN has not authorised or granted consent to. If KCeasy produced a fully seperate network, that simply used the FastTrack protocol, then my view would be different, but it doesnt, so it isnt. KCeasy is using the FastTrack network and Sharman Networks servers without consent, simple really.
Speaking of Kazaa, does anyone have any updates on the KazaaLite deal? I still use it daily and have no problems.
Vote for new mod!!! Score:-2,Imbecile
the right to run a TV ad mentioning Ralph Nader within 30 days of an election for which he is a candidate? "political speech" used to be the least restricted form of "free speech" - now it is arguably the most restricted. And, yes, I know that as long as I could prove to the satisfaction of the FEC that I had had no contact with ANYONE connected to ANY of the presidential candidates campaigns that it would be perfectly ok for me to run my little ad. Problem being that proving such would be impossible, if only because I don't know the identities of everyone connected to all the candidates' campaigns. Much less keep detailed logs of who I talk to in the Walmart checkout lines....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
KCEasy, on the other hand, was providing a way to use Kazaa's network.
It seems to me that is a major difference. Bnetd is basically competing with Blizzard, and reverse engineering to compete is (or should be) fine. KCEasy is basically providing a way to freeload off of Kazaa. I don't see how they should have a right to do that.
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.
Dude, that isn't a good analogy by any stretch of the imagination. Kazaa doesn't own its own network, because it's set up using its users' bandwidth; it doesn't in fact provide very much at all, besides the client. After Napster and Audiogalaxy there isn't much in the way of centralization in these networks. What does this mean? It means that KCEasy provides as much of the "network" infrastructure as the real clients. Nothing of Sharman Networks' bandwidth or computing resources are being used up, so why do they get to say who can come in and who stays out?
... Ford Motors, inc. has announced its patent on "ROAD", a network protocol for piloting land vehicles. Several other companies, including General Motors, DaimlerChrysler, Honda, Toyota, Volkswagen, Nissan, and Uncle Hiram's Buggies also make vehicles that are compatible with the ROAD protocol.
Ford has threatened to sue these companies, alleging that they reverse-engineered key parts of ROAD, including the maximum width of allowable vehicles, and the use of round "wheels" for efficient travel on ROAD networks.
-3Suns
~~~~
The Revolution will be Slashdotted
How about the right to make a backup of a CD you bought? Oops, you can't. They are protected and circumventing that is illegal under the DMCA. So if you want to use your right, you have to break the law. That's the same as losing that right.
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.
Get up off their network, you didn't have permission to be accessing with and/or generating traffic on it. Damn, just because it's FOSS doesn't give the creator the right to access other people's shit.
Wouldn't it be funny if KCEasy was a shell company for the **AA, and when Sharman showed up in court to face them...
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
>Reverse engineering to be another on the list of rights that have fallen by the wayside?
All rights that are not defended will fall by the wayside.
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
I'm not technically adept enough to argue the qualities of the app itself, but I think it's interesting to note that a couple of posters have mentioned that KCEasy folded easily.
The above is what concerns me. I don't know jack about German law, but I think it's sad that we are again seeing that the mere threat of possible legal action is an effective deterrent.
Today's Davids will never even get a shot at their Goliaths if they can't even afford the price of admission to the arena.
The Dalai Llama
...yeah, I know they fought in an open field...whatever...
My sig could be your sig!
The question of the right to reverse engineer. If reverse engineering becomes illegal and is applied retroactivly, wouldn't that invalidate about half of everything M$ claims or owns?
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
At least I can still get the plugin code through a file sharing network.
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.
Yes, it's in the Bill of Rights, Ninth Ammendment to be specific.
In this particular case the right is simply the right to write software. You have as much right to write software as anyone else. The fact that someone else has written some software that does the same thing or something similar doesn't at all restrict you in you your rights to write software.
What you don't have the right to do is violate their patents and copyrights. If you are not violating a patent, copyright or some other explicit right of someone else, then, well, you're just writting software.
Because you feel like it, and it's your right.
See IBM vs. Phoenix.
KFG
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
i'm tired of all these folks making up "rights" that don't exist.
And I'm tired of people thinking we don't have rights just because they aren't spelled out in the Constitution. Remember, the Constitution limits the rights of the government, it doesn't grant the people rights. We have them to begin with.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
One Way for the RIAA to Go on the Offensive
Well this time I think they are full of shit.
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
Kazaa is such an reputable organization! How can this be possible?
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
Intel didn't own the plants producing IBM's BIOS chips, nor does Sharman own the computers that make up the Kazaa network.
So your analogy does hold up to an extent, but maybe not the way you intended.
y
If the trade secret/network can be reverse engineered and this is legal and interoperating causes no impact on Kazaa's equipment etc., does Kazaa have the right to prevent other clients from using what is only the same protocol and network standards which were legally reverse engineered?
My gut feeling is no . . . but I wonder if the courts have already ruled on this . . .
Kazaa should have made their network password protected and the servers members only. That way bypassing the membership would be illegal. Reverse engineering is something vital to competition and should not be hindered.
HTTP/1.1 400
Interoperability with someone else's device is exactly the point of reverse engineering. You may look at Sega v. Accolade (pre-DMCA) for a good example, where it found that Accolade could copy those functions made by Sega required for compatibility with their console. The analogy with game (client) and console (server) works pretty well.
The same right was explicitly upheld in the DMCA (Title 17, Chapter 12, Section 1201f). So it should be 100% legal. Not that it seems that way, but anyway. What may be illegal is to use said software, since you may be bound by the Terms Of Service in order to connect to the network. But that is an issue between Sherman networks and the users, not the developers. Genuine slashlawyer advice(TM).
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
If I follow, it seems that Poisoned also provides a front-end to access FastTrack. Does this mean Poisoned will also be getting a letter in the mail soon? Or will Sharman lay off Poisoned because there is no official KaZaa for Mac OS X?
"He'd be a broader guy if he had dropped acid once." - Steve Jobs on Bill Gates
...Has gotten to be as nortorius as patents. So I'll just use my classic example of why this could lead to a much worse world:
If everyone had the right to stop reverse engineering of their products, Ford should be allowed to send cease and desist letters to anyone who makes cars. Because building interoperable parts, or better cars infringes on their rights. Besides, who needs a Ferrari anyway?
Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
Switch to OpenFT. It's where all my files are shared, although I still freeload off of FastTrack (mirroring whatever I downloaded to OpenFT).
BTW, I use Poisoned, a good giFT front-end for OS X.
Here is a list of the most popular giFT front-ends.
pi = 3.141592653589793helpimtrappedinauniversefactory7
Reverse Engineering is still legal!!!
I mean, Attorney General Ashcroft has been doing it to the Bill of Rights for years now!
If what you are reading sounds funny, or sarcastic, lame, or stupid
it is because it is supposed to be. just laugh
Just because people don't like the RIAA doesn't make Kazaa good.
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
You can still Dl the old version of Kceasy 0.11 from Kazaa.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Excellent point. ;-)
One has to look no further than our own Decleraion of Indepence to see that we are granted, "Ceritan unalienable rights...". Just because these rights are not set out in stone, does not mean they do not exsist, infact, I would prefer they where not spelled out in stone, least some over zealous prosoctor would attempt to charge me with crime on am over drawn technicality.
Excellent point you made: We need to look at the big picture of these companies using patents to stifle P2P progress.
The Public Patent Foundation and the EFF (Patent) are starting campaigns (Story here) to invalidate bogus patents like the one here, #5,978,791 , you mentioned. Time to donate your money to these organizations (or your time with letters, and email to inform the public if you cannot afford it) to curb corporate threats to technological innovation.
Excellent quote. Maybe now I can remove the tracking device from my cell phone? Technology advanced quite fine for tens of thousands of years without patents. The patent system does not produce scientists or engineers. And it never will. Likewise, when your competitor abuses the commons then you have to also to stay competitive. Reverse engineering is a requirement for competition whether for software protocols, sales tricks, or other aspects of everyday life. TimJowers
Expect Freedom.
I'm tired of all these folks making up "rights" that don't exist.
I'm tired of clueless fools without the intestinal iortitude to post their gripe without logging in. Nice abuse of AC posting there buddy.
Without reverse engineering you would NOT have the cheap PC's you have today, you certianly would not be driving the car you have and most certianly wouldn't be watching that TV you have.
reverse engineering has been common place in industry for eons. and used by clever people for centuries before that.... hell MAJOR WARS were won by reverse engineering.
only a complete and true moron would not know and understand that..... well either a moron or a SCO Executive Staff Officer.. but then that might be an insult to morons..
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
I'm going to patent the process of reverse engineering.
Anyway, think that is a mistake doing that, even leaving the "free speech" argumentation on a side. More clients means more ways to access means more people that is at the very least aware of them, and a far richer network. Of course, they could had seen that a dangerous percent of the clients of that networks weren't their own client, but still that was not the right reaction.
If this is copyright and/or patent infringment, then it's illegal. If it's genuine theft of intellectual property (information gained by illicit means), then it's illegal. But if it's reverse engineering based on observing the technology, then it should be fair game.
If it's true reverse engineering, then this is just a bully threatening a weakling on the digital playground.
Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
"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.
Keep in mind this applies to trade secrets, not patents. In order to have a trade secret, you cannot publish it. i.e. A Trade Secret cannot be a patent because you would have to disclose, in this case, the formula.
If the formula for XCEL were patented, There would be no need for reverse engineering as Phil would already have the formula for XCEL (it was published for patent protection), and couldn't reproduce it legally without a license.
Anyone have any guesses?
There has been chat around here about someone who wants to tell Sharman to cram it (since you have a right to reverse engineer a network) to simply fork KCeasy (since its GPL) and await another letter.
Let us set up a forked project then, with donations to fight this bullshit.
I am willing to fight, show me the way.
(p.s. mod parent up plz)
Blizzard uses a CDKEY to validate the game is legitamate and not pirated.
BnetD allows you to play without a CDKEY.
In fact thats the only thing good about bnetd is stealing Blizzard games.
Blizzard is one of the few companies that makes quality video games anymore. I don't see why people are up in arms against them.
God spoke to me
anyone else here find it ironic that a company that thrives on vionating other people's intellectual property rights is getting angry when given a taste of their own medicine?
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
In the case of a game server, that's exactly the issue, Blizzard (or whoever) _does_ want responsibility for the network's activity, and since authorized clients represent sold copies of the game, they'd have good reasons to want to only let those clients interact with the server and each other.
In Kazaa's case, the goal is supposedly to share files with as many people as possible. "Unauthorized" clients actually help the system, creating more download sources and more unique files. What's in question then is control. Kazaa would like to control what clients talk to "its" network, but claims no control whatsoever over the content distributed through said network.
This seems a common trend in the software world, companies want more and more _control_, whether or not it means improving the experience of using their product. As a certain convicted monopoly has shown, excessive control can indeed lead to increased profit. What Kazaa should remember, though, is that it can also make users bitter enough to bail on a product.
On a side note, it was largely software companies' control-hungry actions that led me to abandon proprietary software altogether on my home machines. Granted I'm a weird case, but I'm definitely not alone in being fed up with software companies being uptight bullies.
It doesn't have to say it. Don't we get the right to do anything we want as long as the law doesn't actually forbid it? Thats how I thought it worked.
Wow, I think the mods are full of shit on this one.
Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein
Well put. A professor once told me the classic definition and difference between us (Capitalism) and the USSR (Communism / Socialism) was the USSR's laws stated what the people could do, while ours state what we can't do. Though not the same, the point is similar. You are absolutely right.
/me sips his coffee and ponders a new sig...
Wrong. You have to have 2 CALs. One server, one client. If your client is Win2k or XP, you already paid for a client CAL.
Then yes, it doesn't matter what software you run as long as you paid 2 CALs for that one user (isn't it lovely? :P)
"I can't give you a brain, so I'll give you a diploma" - The Great Oz (blatently stolen sig)
How dare you steal my bandwidth while I'm busy stealing music!
Mine is Good
Yeah, and why don't we have the right to back up our 20 dollar bills? Those suckers are expensive to replace.
Mine is Good
Cry havoc, and let loose the rights of engineers!
...or is that cry "hacker"?
What makes you think reverse engineering is legal when it isn't a huge corporation doing it? Look at DVD Jon and MPAA. Look at any of a few dozen cases where a megacorp's technology was RE'ed, and you'll see hundreds of lawsuites. It may be that technically RE'ing isn't illegal, but the legal battles to enforce your rights make it effectively illegal in this age of lunitic IP laws. Information may want to be free, but the legal battles will give any average joe pause.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Yeah. Even then you have the right to break the law, and take the rap.
My faith is expressed through Nihilism. Do you understand?
Please don't give them any ideas.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
I use Poisoned for OS X. Connects just like KCeasy through gift.
I tend to filter out all the kazaa results anyways, most all are blocked by firewall, mislabeled or other similar issues.
Someone like Sharman forcing alternative clients out is sort of just funny, but hey, I don't think this will make KCeasy that much less usable.
I wonder if that would stand up in court. The music industry using unfair tactics to destroy their products and business. If it did work and KaZaa won, what then?
There's no legal precedent to support client-access licenses being requirred to access a server.
That's simply supported by any contracts you might sign with Microsoft.
The /. community makes their analogies like children pulling words out of the dictionary at random and stringing them together.
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
I'd agree with this. Imagine that just before a war that a company produces a cipher machine, which becomes a standard, like the Enigma in WW2, and gets a patent. During the war, a contractor working for NSA or it's equivalent cracks the code, and uses its own program to listen in on enemy war plans, etc. Following this logic, the company producing the cipher machine could sue the contractor. Or if someone invents a new method of radio modulation. If Sharman can issue a C&D notice, then if the inventor of FM made radios, he could stop anyone from making FM radios. In the same way, RCA could stop people from making tvs that use the PAL broadcasting system. But they don't, and if they had, they would never have become as popular as they are. If Sharman don't let open source clients become available, then many people also won't have the trust in them that there is in open source programs. Who here worries about spyware/adware/malicious code in the linux kernel?
Simply grab the setup file for version 0.11 (Which includes the FT plugin), install it, then install version 0.12 (which doesn't include the FastTrack Plugin) which will then give you the option of using the previously installed FT plugin.
Enjoy.
My email addy? should be easy enough.
I can't say anything about the US (or the rest of the world) but in Belgium you can bring a damaged bank note to the bank and have it replaced at no charge as long as the serial number is still readable. Can't say the same thing about CDs.
Sounds like a good opportunity for you to open a record company that let's people trade in damaged music for new! You could get rich!
Mine is Good
I consider the right to examine and explore the world around you, a fundamental right. The right to learn how things work is a part of this. This is a natural right that was not enumerated in the constitution because it was not in jeopardy at the time.
Reverse Engineering is merely a more technically rigorous expression of this right. I certainly don't see how it is "simply legal". In fact, in DMCA cases, it's technically illegal, but it's still a fundamental right that the constitution does not give the government authority to restrict.
----
Open mind, insert foot.