Slashdot Mirror
Interview with Alexander Noe, PxScan Developer
wikinerd writes "I interviewed Alexander Noe, developer of the open source PxScan and PxView utilities. He recently received a cease-and-desist letter by Shinano Kenshi, the Japanese company which controls Plextor. His utilities provide similar functionality with PlexTools, sending special command sequences to Plextor DVD recorders that activate special features such as media quality check."
It was already slow for me:
0 5jun
The interview was completed through IRC chat. The whole text is released under a "verbatim copying" licence, so we encourage you to re-publish it if you wish (see the full licence at the end).
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: Hello, please introduce yourself and briefly describe the utilities you developed.
Alexander Noé: I'm Alexander Noé:, currently studying computer science at TU-Chemnitz. The utilities PxScan/PxView i've developed perform error scans on Plextor PX-712/716 and Plextor Premium drives. The tests are the same, but PlexTools had some handling I didn't like, for example you can run several tests on DVDs, but in PlexTools you couldn't trigger them at once, but rather had to trigger one test at one time. My goal was just to make all that more convenient.
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: You received a letter via email about these utilities. Who sent the letter and what did it say?
Alexander Noé: The letter was sent by lawyers working for Shinano Kenshi. The Lawyers claim those utilities would violate their clients rights.
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: Have you replied to this letter?
Alexander Noé: No, I haven't.
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: Why do you think the lawyers sent this letter, and what are their requests?
Alexander Noé: Plextor maybe sees me as competitor. However, they don't offer any Linux version, neither free nor for money, so I have absolutely no idea what their problem with pxlinux could possibly be. They demand that I cease-and-desist from any further infringements, and demand that I comply a list of all steps I've taken to ensure that their clients' rights will no longer be infringed.
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: Have you contacted a professional lawyer yet? Did you receive any legal advice?
Alexander Noé: A professional lawyer said that in his opinion, none of the accusations made by Shinano are justified.
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: Is the letter confidential, can you post it for everyone to see?
Alexander Noé: The letter itself is not explicitely marked as such, but I'm not sure if I have the right to publish an email sent to me in general without the sender agreeing on this.
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: In the last years there are increasingly more legal problems for free/libre/open-source software projects. Now software patents may be introduced in Europe. What are your views on this issue?
Alexander Noé: I *really* hope that software patents will not be introduced, but I can't do much about it... as I don't really understand lawyer and politician language, like most people, I can hardly assess the consequences software patents would cause, but it wouldn't make life of free developers easier.
Have your say! Discuss in Wikinerds Forum (unregistered users are welcome).
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: What do you plan to do now?
Alexander Noé: I'm waiting what will happen....
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: Anything more you want to say?
Alexander Noé: Considering that Plextor did, not long ago, announce that they would be supporting open-source, I really wonder what all this is supposed to be about. Either they support open-source, or at least "tolerate" it, or they don't.
Nikolaos S. Karastathis: The interview appears to be finished. Thank you very much!
The text of this article is Copyright (C) 2005 by Alexander Noé and Nikolaos S. Karastathis. Verbatim copying and redistribution of the entire text of this article are permitted provided this notice is preserved and a reference to its original location is provided: http://portal.wikinerds.org/interview-alex-noe-20
Specially since you buy the DRIVE not the software. The software is the COST of doing business. The problem is you have ignorant marketting and investors who think "everything has commercial value".
.doc file and give it out.
Look at Broadcom. They hold their hardware specs a closely guarded secret [for the most part] and the net affect is you can only use their wifi stuff [reliably] in windows... The problem is without the drivers the hardware has zero customer value. But giving out free drivers lets you SELL hardware since it now has value.
The sad thing it isn't even that you have to write the damn drivers. In the OSS world of BSD/Linux the kernel contributors would GLADLY write a driver for free if it meant they could use some quality hardware with the respective OS. So all it costs the hardware manufacturer is describing the interface [at the high level] of how to talk to the hardware. Since these documents are ROUTINELY produced internally so the software teams can write their windows drivers all it means is you re-brand the
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
The original source of this story is this thread on the CD Freaks Plextor DVD Burner Forum. I guess the comments in that thread tell a lot about what long time customers of Plextor think at the moment.
Seriously, serious legal threats usually don't arrive via email. Lawyers usually prefer to speak with certified letters and such, where they know it was received and who received it and when (and can prove it in court), and so in general anything received via email should be taken with a big grain of salt. Email is too unreliable (my spam filter ate it!) and just hasn't been around enough decades to make the legal system trust it. At most, they might send a certified letter and an email at the same time (and so the email will arrive first) but I suspect that even that's rare.
The email may be legitimate, and in this case it sounds like it probably is, but even so ... big grain of salt.
Plextor may be doing a couple things. First and foremost, they're making sure no unauthorized Open Source projects spring up. They have no interest in supporting the software unless they wrote it. I can understand this motivation. We all remember the Mandrake Linux release that killed some CD RW drives, and Plextor is no doubt concerned about a similar problem for them.
Plextor would have nothing to fear if they've followed the ATAPI / MMC specifications correctly. Those drives that died (I had one) implemented something like a firmware flash (or "trash") command using the same opcode as the write cache flush command (or something similar, the details in my head are fading). On a CD-ROM drive, write cache flush obviously is unnecessary, however, that doesn't mean that the opcode can be grabbed to be used for something else. The CD-ROM manufacturer was the root cause of this problem.
The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
Even if they explicitly tell him not to do so, he can still make public the information in the letter.
They have copyright on the letter. What he needs to do is paraphrase the letter, with attribution, and quote only the most unbelievably stupid parts.
As for the original program, they need to tell him which specificy rights of theirs he is violating. The is no such thing as generic "intellectual property". There are only copyright, patent, trade secret, trademark, and contractual rights.
Unless they have a patent on the method his program uses to perform the activity his program performs, or he's violating an NDA or using their trademark, they can't stop him from performing the activity.
Bottom line: they can't stop him from publishing his code, only theirs. Using the same methods they use doesn't violate their copyright.
sigs, as if you care.