Autodesk Suing to Keep Format Closed

An anonymous reader writes "AutoCAD is by far the industry standard CAD tool for engineering drawings. When I was an engineering student it was on every computer in the college of engineering. Autodesk, the makers of the AutoCAD software, are attempting to quash an effort to reverse-engineer the proprietary binary format used by AutoCAD. Looking at the court order, their whole argument revolves around something called TrustedDWG that basically looks like a digital signature that verifies the file was created by an Autodesk product."

Comments

More like "gotcha last"

[RobertB-DC]

Looking at the Open Design folks site brings up this tidbit:

The Open Design Alliance understands that Autodesk has, for approximately two years, been distributing application programs which include our copyrighted DGNdirect libraries, for reading and writing DGN V8 format files. Autodesk does not have, nor has it ever had, any license or right to use DGNdirect in its application programs. We believe that Autodesk, by its actions, is infringing our copyright.

All Autodesk had to do was join the Open Design Alliance, and they could use the ODA libraries without restriction. Instead, they filed suit.

Don't forget to read The Autodesk File for more insights into how the once-revered company became just another soulless money hole.

Re:Won't happen - too many precedents

[DeepRedux]

The judge hearing the case disagrees. He signed an order saying

the Court finds that Audodesk has demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits.

This wording was proposed by Audodesk's lawyers, but signed by the judge.

Increasingly Irrelevant Anyway

[DG]

For those who have never done CAD:

AutoCAD is a 2D drawing tool with functions optimized for the production of scale drawings. It is an extension of the old T-Square And Pencil technique into the computer; a sort of Adobe Illustrator tuned to drafting.

It is very, very good at this, and I found it (given that I had a little old skool drafting experience) fairly easy to adapt to.

But at its core, you're still projecting 3D objects into 2D or psudo 3D (orthometric projections) using the draftsman's brain as the projection device.

Enter Solidworks.

Solidworks is a parametric 3D modeling package. You create the object in 3D, and then the software generates your 2D drawings from it. No more construction lines. No more mismatched views.

There have been 3D modelers before (VariCAD for Linux isn't bad) but Solidworks takes it a step farther - it remembers every step in the construction of an object, and every step is tunable. Where past 3D modelers used Boolean operations to construct their shapes - but then the shape was fixed - Solidworks allows you to change the parameters of every operation at any time. Punch a hole through an object, but then discover it is the wrong size? No problem - just select the hole in the object's construction tree, and change its size.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

It has revolutionized mechanical drawing, to the point where it is inconceivable that I'd ever use AutoCAD ever again. Solidworks is one of the few software packages I've ever used that just left me dumbfounded in amazement at how powerful, easy, and intuitive it is.

And no, I don't work for them. :)

DG

Re:Industry Standard?

[mungtor]

"If you use AutoCAD and decide to move to another software, you either have to redraw all of your current drawings or do without them."

No, you don't. Most major CAD systems will import DWG files since they have paid the licensing fees to AutoDesk to include a utility to perform the import. It isn't always pretty, but the functionality exists.

Re:Trademark, what?

[shystershep]

The Lanham Act is the federal trademark code. What Autodesk is trying to argue is that anyone 'faking' their 'TrustedDWG' technology is violating their trademark. The best analogy I can think of is GM saying you can only put 'genuine GM' parts in their cars. Of course, it is a lot more complex than that here, and judges aren't known for their technological savvy. The keystone of trademark law, though, is how likely something is to confuse the consumer. In other words, for Autodesk to win they will have to show that consumers are likely to confuse this imitation 'TrustedDWG' for the real thing; i.e., that since it's a .dwg file, it must have been made/come from Autodesk.

Not sure what I think of their chances. On the one hand, AutoCAD is so ubiquitous that anyone that has any need for CAD probably automatically associates .dwg files with AutoCAD. On the other hand, well . . . who gives a shit? It'd be like MS claiming trademark in .doc files -- sure, everyone knows .doc files = Word, but it's something that's below the radar. It's not like you go into a store to buy a .doc or .dwg file, and might be confused about it's source.

It's been a while since I've looked at the Lanham Act, but I think Autodesk would have to prove some sort of damage, even if they were able to show likelihood of confusion.

Re:Industry Standard?

[Hillgiant]

Blech. At least as late as Microstation 98, it was a button driven piece of trash. Our drafters needed two monitors. One for the drawing and one for the ocean of palettes required to do the drafting. Call me a luddite if you must, but a CLI/keyboard interface will always be faster for Drafting than a GUI/palette driven one. The tools need to change too fast to waste time zipping the mouse around the screen.

Ummmm how about NO?

[DnemoniX]

I am the IT Director for a county, I can tell you that AutoCAD is used heavily outside of teaching. Not only does our Highway Department use it exclusively for designing civil engineering projects such as roads and bridges, but the State Department of Transport also uses it for nearly every aspect of their projects. I have several friends who work in many different aspects of design and engineering from CNC work to design prototyping for medical devices. Surprise! They all use CAD products from Autodesk.

Re:Industry Standard?

[rtaylor187]

Most of the posts here seem to be stating that AutoCAD isn't the "standard" because
it isn't the leader in the arena of 3D design.

AutoCAD is _not_ the standard for 3D design. I'm not sure it ever was...
Autodesk competes in that arena with their Inventor product - but I don't think
that they are anywhere near the market leader. It's a pretty fragmented market.

However, I believe the AutoCAD _is_ the standard for 2D architectural drawing.
This is the arena where architects (or, rather, the draftsman working for an architect)
draw the 2D drawings. Buildings, landscapes, etc.

Re:Format War

[chill]

So far as I am aware, no company has EVER succeeded in blocking other people from reverse engineering their file format.

Enter the DMCA, stage right-wing. AutoDESK added basic encryption to the file format starting with AutoCAD 2004. Now, instead of just reverse engineering the protocol, you would have to decrypt it as well. This is now, in the U.S., against the law except for certain conditions. This one, interoperability, may well be one of the conditions, but that will be up to a judge.

And file formats are THE key. This is why Microsoft doesn't provide the full specs on .doc, .xls, .ppt, Project or other file formats. This is why AutoDESK is fighting so hard to keep .DWG closed. Switching to another program, including training your entire user base, is child's play compared to making sure that mountain of existing files you have can still be read and used.

"Function A is under a different menu in OOo Writer than MS Word" and "This function doesn't seem to exist in OOo Calc" are trivial compared to "I can't read this document" and "My formulas don't work any more".

Lock those customers in tight enough, and they'll not only put up with getting screwed, they'll fight for your right to screw them as hard as you want.

Re:Fighting the Last War--Muskets are Out

[addsalt]

This is a new millenium and 2D is not gone, but it is dying fast. There are still plenty of applications (wiring schematics, HVAC) that don't transfer well into 3D and will continue to use 2D applications. Even in applications that are based around a 3D model still need a 2D interface for creating prints.

inspired Rudy Rucker's Hacker and the Ants

[purplelocust]

Autodesk was a market leader and a real Silicon Valley 80s-90s wonder. One of the great things that came out of it, indirectly, was the book "The Hacker and the Ants" by Rudy Rucker which had some obvious inspiration from the time Rucker spent at Autodesk. The CEO at that time John Walker is a remarkable guy. As a bunch of people have already pointed out, they are long past market relevance (except for legacy lockin issues) so this is sad, but they were at one time quite the acme of geekdom.

Re:Trademark, what?

[drinkypoo]

Not sure what I think of their chances.

I'm not sure either, and IANAL, but if I wanted to contest this I would probably cite Sega v. Accolade (Scroll down, copied text appears here:

If you will recall from our earlier discussion, it was none other than Electronic Arts who first determined how to bypass the proprietary Sega code in the Genesis and thereby produce its own videogame cartridges. In response to EA's actions, Sega developed a new security system for the Genesis and quietly incorporated it into the system boot ROM starting with the 1991 production batches. Sega called this proprietary code the TradeMark Security System (TMSS). In essence, it was a simplified version of the 10NES lockout chip that Nintendo had used in the NES. Sega had elected not to go to the 10NES route because they felt that a complete lockout solution was needless overkill. Their solution, the TMSS, was based on very simple principles of intellectual property law. A piece of code burned into the Genesis boot ROM would look for a header code that was supposed to be part of every Genesis program stored in cartridge format. If the header code contained certain unique characteristics, then it was a legitimately licensed Sega product. If the TMSS did not find what it sought, then it would refuse to boot up the system. If the system booted correctly, then the TMSS would display the phrase PRODUCED BY OR UNDER LICENSE FROM SEGA ENTERPRISES LTD. on the screen for a few seconds before running the program contained inside the cartridge. Both pieces of code, the one in the TMSS and the correct cartridge header code, were copyrighted Sega property. The TMSS also generated a trademark display every time it was activated, that being the Sega name itself. In essence, the TMSS was a double tripwire for anybody trying to produce unlicensed Genesis cartridges. If you made an unlicensed cartridge that activated the TMSS, then you were in violation of both copyright and trademark law. If you could figure out a way to get your game running without tripping the TMSS, then you were legally in the clear.

Most of us know how that turned out - Accolade eventually won the right to continue to distribute their game cartridges. Sega went on to do the same kind of crap on the Dreamcast, but they weren't able to prevent clever programmers from putting a notice on the same screen that came up saying "licensed by sega" that says "no, it isn't, but this message has to be here".

Re:Sounds like printers... what happened with them

[MindStalker]

Yea, but they sued under the DMCA. These guys would have sued under the DMCA probably had it not been for that case. So they are trying a unique approach and calling it a trademark issue. By court standards the previous case would have little precedent on this one (though I'm sure it will be mentioned).

Re:Trademark, what?

[kbaud]

Trademarks are a way to get around good limitations in patents (like the pesky fact that patents expire).

All a monopoly has to do is claim that their technical design is so recognized by consumers that they claim a trademark on it. Then it doesn't matter if the patent expired. Sure, the USPTO claims to not allow trademarks on patentable ideas, but it happens. The USPTO is just too overworked. Companies know this and force trademarks through anyways. Then one day you find out that a particular idea or standard is completely inaccessible to you forever.

Trademarks don't expire nor can they be revoked after they pass the 5yr no-contest period. They are much stronger than a patent and a common form of abuse now with big companies.

Did you know for example that the cylinder shape is irrevocably trademarked for certain products?

This probably sounds incredible to most people. Search the http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=searchss&sta te=qdqb5u.1.1 for trademark #75501874 (I have not found a way to link directly to a record in their database).

And this is just one of many examples. This and other reasons is why people are calling for IP reform.

peter

RealDWG

[lanthar]

As someone who's been writing AutoCAD plugins using their API software many years... All the TrustedDWG thing does is basically tell the person opening a dwg in autocad that the file was last saved by a trusted dwg product (i.e. one using AutoDesk's software, or one of their own APIs). Consider it like having the right to slap the Windows XP Certified logo on your software. That's all it does. There's no encryption, no DRM stuff here... it just prints a string of text in the AutoCAD command window when you open the file. Is it right for some other company to claim to be AutoDesk? No. But why does Autodesk bother, you ask? The main concern for AutoCAD here is not that the OpenDesign (formerly OpenDWG) Alliance is reverse engineering their format. AutoDesk is partnered with several companies that use the OpenDesign API, and AutoDesk is well aware of them using it. Opening a dwg generated from the OpenDesign API, however, was marking files as being a Genuine AutoDesk product file, which guarantees that AutoDesk programs were the last programs to have saved the file. Aside from the point that people have been asking AutoDesk to open up the DWG format legally for years, there are some considerations here. Consider the issue of the OpenDesign API having a bug that corrupted the DWG files, in a subtle way that eventually caused problems in AutoDesk programs. AutoDesk shouldn't have to help companies with support agreements to solve it... they can just throw up their hands and say, sorry, but your file was not last saved by us... your other program corrupted this file, talk to them. Really it's only right. Would you expect MS to help you find the cause of formatting loss or file corruption on a word document that you had saved with OpenOffice? What's wrong with trademarking your files? It's not like they are saying it is illegal to use them any way you want to, nor that the OpenDesign Alliance must stop releasing the API... they just don't want another company claiming to be generating genuine AutoDesk files. Also worth noting here is that AutoDesk sells their own API to access dwg files without a copy of AutoCAD or AutoDesk Map installed... This API is currently called RealDWG (formerly known as DwgUnplugged). This is sold at a one time fee to a company with the right to make small applications or viewers for reselling. The fee for the license to make your own dwg format manipulating program is somewhere around $5000 last I heard... for a license to make your own software from the ground up, using their dwg access API and resell it. One last point... According to that site, the OpenDesign people have already released an update that no longer violates the AutoDesk trademark by claiming that their software was an AutoDesk product.

Re:CAD and AutoDesk

[DAtkins]

Oh geeze, I completly forgot the preferences and plotstyle issues of upgrading.

When they decided to move the preferences directory from /acad/support to /documents & settings/user name/acad/Acad vCrap/r16.0/enu/support - boy that was just great. Now instead of telling users "put it in your support folder" I get to explain how to turn on hidden directories, what a hidden directory is, what the documents & settings folder does, how it knows what their user name is, blah, blah, blah. Not to mention that I now can't just TYPE IN the directory anymore.

And why, in the name of Jesus Zombie Christ, did they remove express tools from the installation? Oh, it's on the CD, but I have to do it manually for every user the IT guy forgets to install it for. Oh, and we don't do batch plot anymore we call it publish now - which doesn't plot multiple sets anymore either and is pretty much useless. You can thank us by buying the latest version in 6 months.

Bah humbug.

My ACAD rep is also my plotter rep. I hear from that guy twice a month...

Similarly in logitech

[DrYak]

I don't know if it's true or just an urban legend, but it's a funny concept.

Logitech's DOS mouse driver MOUSE.COM (dumped from an actual copy I've here) :

This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

Also mentioned here by other /.ers :
The Dreamcast boot code checks and runs only games that display "PRODUCED BY OR UNDER LICENSE FROM SEGA" in their Loader.
Opensource environment like KallistiOS feature a Loader that displays the required string on-sreen, and then adds an explanation that in fact, it's not under Sega's License, but that the string is required to the game to boot.

So the trick isn't urban legend and is genuinly used to circumvent such string checks, although I don't know if the trick was also used by PC BIOS cloners