Slashdot Mirror
Piriform Asks BleachBit To Remove Winapp2.ini Importer
ahziem writes "As author of the BleachBit system cleaner, I received a polite but firm request from Piriform, makers of the similar application CCleaner, to remove a two-year-old feature from BleachBit that allows individual BleachBit users to import winapp2.ini data files created by the community that define which files to delete for applications. Does Piriform's request have merit? Do I need a lawyer? What is a good response to avoid any ugly situation?"
Do I need a lawyer? What is a good response to avoid any ugly situation?
And once again for the 1,000,000 time, yes, and this isn't the place to get legal advice...
On the other hand, a "firm request" doesn't quite sound like a legal threat. Anyone can send a "firm request".
Maybe check it with a REAL lawyer, but not worry too much until the people you've collided with send you a letter with more solid threats?
Who knows, I'm not a lawyer...
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
I am not a lawyer nor your lawyer, but I would just ignore the e-mail. Don't answer, just ignore it. Importing a text file has nothing to do with their ToS. This is not a legal advice.
If you don't distribute the ini file, and the ini file isn't encrypted, you can ignore his request the same way anyone who creates an emulator, but doesn't distribute any roms (and doesn't include any functionality to break any encryption some roms may have) does. There's nothing illegal about what you've done, AFAIK.
Of course, talking to a lawyer is the only place to get proper legal advice, slashdot is just a peanut gallery.
You can read and parse any file you like.
In what scenario is this possibly a problem?
(Unless someone stole code)
I wouldn't blink until they had their lawyer send a hard copy to you. Email copy if you can authenticate.
IANAL nor a programmer. Anyway, reverse-engineering is legal though I have no idea how you did it. If you had no help from their program then they don't have much to stand on. If you did, then they may have cause to sue but it's possible all they can sue for is a breach of EULA (NOT a contract).
Considering it's just an INI file, I doubt it was too difficult to figure out. Nobody owns file extensions, and nobody should own data except the creator, but software patents make the last part a bit murky.
I've been using CCleaner on the few Windows boxes I maintain for a while now. I'd never heard of BleachBit. It looks like it does a lot more than CCleaner, and especially in light of Piriform's obnoxious legal theats, I think I'll switch to BleachBit.
Thanks, Piriform!
Liberty in your lifetime
This is probably just an example of a clueless PHB who doesn't realize the souce of the winapp2.ini files.
Perhaps a polite letter asking how you are violating their TOS, pointing out the source of the winapp2.ini files? Also, you probably never accepted their TOS did you?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
This will depend on the CCleaner files. If they are public visible files anyone can make for themselves, you might well have a valid case. If they are files Piriform makes, maybe not. You need an ATTORNEY to help you determine your position, and especially if they sue you. If the formatting of the CCleaner files involves a patented technology, they could have a valid basis to sue you (even though I would personally disagree with it). If the CCleaner files are encrypted, they may have a case based on cracking them. If they are in the clear, then it's no different than you having written a music player to play UNencrypted music files.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
I know, I know, actually clicking on links in the summary. Horrible me. But in the link of the email sent to you: "How To Integrate CCleaner’s Winapp2.ini File Into Bleachbit". That doesn't exactly sound like community property when the article keeps prefacing winapp2.ini with "CCleaner's". Am I missing something that should be obvious to me?
You aren't using their software. You didn't agree to their terms of service. Their users may have, is this file only from their app or do others use this feature?
If them only....You should probably consult the scum of the earth (a lawyer).
If others....Not as big of a problem in my view, but they may have scum working for them that can cause you problems.
This would be like Microsoft asking OpenOffice not to import Word format. Or, for a closer analogy, for them to ask Mozilla not to have Firefox import IE bookmarks when you install it. This type of thing is done all the time. Unless they claim to have a patent on the format in the .ini file, it's totally fair game.
One doesn't need to be a lawyer to see that a "request", polite or otherwise, has no legal standing unless it has some legal foundation. Are they claiming some kind of legal basis for their request?
If it's nothing more than "We just don't want you to import our stuff" then you can just ignore them if you wish. They can't take you to court on a whim. (Except in the US of course.)
If they have a problem with their TOS being violated, then they should take it up with the people that are actually violating it. (Class action lawsuit anyone? Piriform vs All PC users: importing ini files stored in the clear. Yeah that will work.) It looks like this has nothing to do with you.
This feature annoyed them and they figured, what the heck, if you were weak kneed about it then sending you a pansy email would be the easiest solution.
And once again for the 1,000,000 time, yes, and this isn't the place to get legal advice...
Lemme quote that guy had stated:
Does Piriform's request have merit?
Do I need a lawyer?
What is a good response to avoid any ugly situation?
Of the three quoted questions above, "Do I need a lawyer?" comes closest in resembling a "legal advice", but it ain't.
The gist of what poster "ahziem" was looking for is "What is a good response to avoid any ugly situation?" - that is, how should one go about under that situation.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Why in the world would you have any obligation to honor their TOS? It doesn't legally bind you in any way.
IANAL, but as far as I know it's perfectly legal to build an app to read data from Excel, or Word, or QuickBooks, or whatever... unless it's incrypted (in the U.S.), the makers of those programs have pretty much no say in the matter. And even if encrypted, I would not consider it a moral obligation because the laws against un-encrypting are pretty darned questionable anyway. They are just a form of corporate welfare.
If you agreed to their terms of service (ever) you may be in violation. If you reverse engineered Their file format from scratch then you are in a different position.
http://www.nasw.org/users/nbauman/arkell.htm (language may be NSFW)
WinApp2.ini its maintained by the community of users of CCleaner, System Ninja, and BleachBit... its a simple ini file, which lists for every app one [section] group header, followed by some lines of regex for file selection and one empty line as end of section delimiter
if BleachBit doesnt distribute WinApp2.ini made by ccleaner... just cant see the basis for the request. BleachBit can support the non exclusive .ini configuration format, and the users can freely download the file WinApp2.ini from Winapp2.com and there is nothing ccleaner can do about it
i am missing something ?
Ins response, offer them code (or just a document) to read your custom definition file so they can do the reverse.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It sometimes baffles me how clueless some people are working in IT as "manager". Since when aren't you allowed to write an importer for an ini file that is publicly availabe. That ini file wasn't even written by piriform.
I think this is a case of a manger that wants to get good points from the upperhand, not knowing how ridiculous her/his requests are.
I'd say they have a very flimsy case as .ini is a commonly implemented newline delimited text format consisting of name value pairs. There is no base for any legal case other than "well OUR software generated those file, we are suing him for creating a program that can read text files our software created".
As absurd as it may be, in the real world such an argument may be enough to win a lawsuit -- the law is not about right or wrong, but whose lawyer can make the best case and how ignorant a judge may be (or choose to be) about technology cases.
So yes, they have a claim, and as flimsy as it is, is a valid one
Yes, you need to get a lawyer if you plan on supporting this feature.
No, you may not have to go to court
Essentially, hire a lawyer who is willing to work on a small retainer and fire off a few nasty-grams in reply, that while not threatening, cite the law and the fact that .ini files are exempt from DMCA restrictions and by making use of these files at the operator's discretion and permission (by being the file owner), are not infringing on copyright.
If they file suit against you, you'll have to pony up a larger retainer and respond to the suit. However, since there is no contract or agreement between your parties, you may be able to threaten counter-suit and sue them for legal expenses. Any competent lawyer will be mindful to remind them of these realities and most likely they wont sue.
But all of this requires you obtain counsel and allow said counsel to present your party as a serious player to them.
If you reply personally, they will not take you half as seriously as they would a letter bearing the letterhead from a law firm no matter how small.
It seems that piriform is all worked up about an article that implies that BleachBit is importing CCleaner's data, this article in fact. However, the article does not say anywhere that the data is coming from CCleaner, it says the data is coming from Winapp2. Note that Winapp2 specifically states that they are not affiliated with Piriform!
In other words, it looks like Piriform is saying "You can read the same file format that we can read and we demand that you stop reading it", despite the fact that Piriform has no claim to the files in question.
Basically their message is as follows:
"You're pissing us off by having a feature that competes with us, and we have an army of lawyers to throw at you if you don't back down."
This is blatant intimidation.
Why should you be frightened of a violation of their TOS? Have you or your software agreed to be bound by those terms at any point? No? Well then, why the fuck are they threatening you? Answer: because it's easier than threatening their own customers who might actually be violating those TOS, since threatening them will create a Streisand Effect and have them leaving in droves for good.
You might have another TheOatmeal-versus-FunnyJunk moment here.
Sounds like winapp2 is an independently-developed "application" that Piriform does not own. If you wrote your own libraries to parse the file, then they'll have trouble successfully suing you. But that doesn't mean they won't sue. If you're using their libraries, then best ditch it and rewrite that piece yourself.
In either case, you need a lawyer. Let the lawyer respond.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
...or ingenious 13th degree black belt master of the Streisand Effect.
It seems like you could run into trouble using the name "CCleaner" when referring to this file. It also seems possible that refering to the file name "Winapp2.ini" might be problematic. It doesn't look clear to me if this Winapp2.com community is associated with Piriform at all (it looks to be independent). If that is the case - the base course of action would probably be to supply them with an easy conversion from this format to some other format of your definition and ask that they make that available in addition to the Winapp2.ini file. That way you would be totally in the clear.
CCEnhancer seems to modify, read, and write the same files. I would contact the dev and see if he received a similar warning. If not it will give you a leg up if you can demonstrate that they allow some to perform these actions while attacking others. CCEnhancer in particular is a good example becuase they admit to reading an article that references the software and most certainly know what it is and does.
Only a lawyer will be able to help you with this though.
It's not a legal request and the company has simply asked him to remove the feature. He simply declines, he is under no such obligation.
Here, I'll even craft the letter for him:
Dear Louise,
We are under no legal obligation to remove that feature and we therefore decline. If you believe there is a legal basis then please get your lawyer to outline your claim in more concrete terms.
Yours,...
Don't waste your money. There's nothing here.
No one even knew this thing existed till 10 mins ago.
What is it going to take before these companies learn that blasting them selfs in the foot with 10ga legal garbage threats is just no conductive to staying in business.
Piraform RIP in piece you just signed your own death warrant.
Linux modi 2.6.26-2-parisc
Just tell them no, and be polite about it. You aren't bound by their terms; the users of their software are. Therefore, they need to address this issue with their users, not you.
And remember to be polite! You get more flies with honey than vinegar.
Do it like the Indians in the call centers. Tell them that you are working hard on this issue and are very keen to resolve it as soon as possible, but do nothing in reality.
Play for time until they are bored.
~ Best man at your service.
for the file? if it is NOT piriform, then piriform has no claim to it whatsoever unless they bought exclusive rights to it from the guy that did create it...
The answer is simple:
You need a lawyer to tell you if you need a lawyer.
Can we come up with a new law for this question, kinda like Godwins?
Tip: What some might call a "0 hours minimum" service contract, a lawyer calls a retainer. You pay whether you use it or not, it's usually cheaper than paying per incident, and if you use it more than a time or two, you'll either get canceled or offered a nice shiny new contract with a newer shinier not-so-nice price.
Does Piriform's request have merit? Do I need a lawyer? What is a good response to avoid any ugly situation?
No, maybe, no sure-fire answer. The first option would be to plainly ignore it, which is probably what I would have picked until I got any more formal but since you've already publicly acknowledged receiving it that's out the window. I'd probably reply:
"Your terms of service is an agreement between your company and your users, as BleachBit is not a party to this agreement we see no legal basis for your request and have not evaluated your claims further."
Most likely, you'll hear nothing and it'll go away but they can always send a lawyer after you, in which case you might want one too. But I think this answer should be fairly safe since the only thing you're saying is that you never agreed to any terms of service.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Don't remove this feature. Politely tell Piriformis to go fuck themselves. If you hear from them again, get a lawyer.
But never back down to these bullying assholes. (Unless they're willing to buy you out for $10 million or something, then I think we'd all sell out.)
No. Probably. "No".
honestly if i were you i'd tell them to suck your balls
If it didn't arrive by certified mail requiring a signature, ignore it. Don't respond, don't ask for more details. D O N ' T.
Email has no authority, no authentication, no traceability, nothing.
Responding just adds more burden to you - so don't do it - just ignore that email, and any future emails.
Until you get an official snail mail letter, preferably from a legal firm, relax they're just trolling for a easy fix.
Ridiculous.
They're trying to intimidate without using lawyers because they don't have any legal power to stop you using winapp2 - ignore them.
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
> Does Piriform's request have merit?
Did you read the article they are complaining about? It reads like a how-to to rip off Pirform's data. The subtlety of winapp vs. winapp2 may have gotten lost somewhere. But statements like "The Open Source disk cleaner Bleachbit takes advantage of this as it can import all of CCleaner’s cleaning locations." sounds like a real problem.
Is this a poorly worded article or is the author suggesting taking Pirform’s proprietary data? Does your organization support/encourage people to take Pirform’s proprietary data for use in BleachBit?
The winapp2.com site seems to list a data file from Pirform, not the community. This may not be your responsibility, but it certainly puts the whole community into question. How closely aligned are you with that community?
> What is a good response to avoid any ugly situation?"
I would expect you to be an expert in these tools, this market, and the winapp2 community. The fact that you are asking us these questions suggests you are not. Do you support the article? Do you support the use of anything proprietary to be used by BleachBit? Does the winapp2 community support anything inappropriate with Pirform's data? You should take a position on all of these items. Even if what you are doing is technically legal, how you present yourself can attract unnecessary trouble.
> Do I need a lawyer?
Who knows. So the only safe answer is "Yes". But, this is as much of an image issue as it is a legal issue. You might need a marketing person to explain this as much as a lawyer.
IANL, but I don't see how you could be violating their TOS if you're not a licensee.
From the Winapp2.ini site (numbering added by me):
1. Winapp2.com is the official website of Winapp2.ini, an addon for CCleaner, System Ninja, and
BleachBit
2. This website and its files are not endorsed or supported in any way by Piriform. They take no responsibility for any damages or problems that arise from its use.
3. Many entries from Winapp2.ini have been included in the official builds of CCleaner over time.
Looks like the " CCleaner data" the email is referring to is actually Winapp2 data included into CCleaner.
I think, therefore you are.
just go ahead and remove the feature, it will save you a world of hurt!
don't be a tool to lawyers, i've had a friend who tried and you'll have to remove it anyway and be off $10,000 poorer.
Quote from Piriform "As this is against our terms of use, we kindly request that you remove this feature."
Did you even agree to their TOS, or even download, install or execute their software ?
Im not a lawyer (Just another Slashdot nutbag Lol), but I thought that you are not using any of their closed source code in your open source product,
nor are you using their dll's or their data.
Isnt this kinda like a Musician saying please remove the mp3 capability in your player, as this violates the TOS of our music ?
I don't understand what the problem is, this all looks like legal mumbojumbo to me. Can anyone give me a layman's understanding of the situation?
Why is Piriform reaching out when WinApp2's own site says: "This website and its files are not endorsed or supported in any way by Piriform."
Click reply, type "No, thank you."
Send.
Winapp2 is produced by the same people as Bleach. This is a giant AstroTurf circle.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
By posting to Slashdot, you've guaranteed that either they will put up, or slink away in shame. Well done, really. I'm pleased to see all that shame-on-you-lawyers posts on Slashdot lately.
Yer not from around heah, are yew?
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I am not a lawyer nor your lawyer, but I would just ignore the e-mail. Don't answer, just ignore it.
IAAL (not practising) and a developer and this comes closest to what I know I ought to do in this situation. Don't communicate until such time as a formal legal request is made and then communicate only as per legal advice.
Personally I would be fighting with myself really hard to stop replying (aka giving them evidence)... however I wouldn't dream of representing myself (not even if I were practising).
At this stage I would save myself the $$$ and just wait to see if they escalate the matter. I'm in no position to assess the legal liabilities in your particular situation. Nor should you accept the analysis or assurances of anyone commenting here. It may be they have no case, in which case their lawyer should tell them to wear it. At least in my jurisdiction a lawyer can face disciplinary proceedings for initiating action without "reasonable chance of success," and threatening legal action where no legal basis exists is a huge no-no (for lawyers that is). That may be different where you or Piriform are.
If a formal legal letter threatening action (a lawyer is of course free to ask you to stop doing something on behalf of a client ... "pretty please ...") were received I would take legal advice in quick order.
This is not a legal advice.
Nor, it should go without saying, is this. It's just what I would do. If it makes you sleep better at night and you have cash to splash about you may want to get your legal team to take these jokers apart starting tomorrow.
Last time *I* followed advice from Slashdot on the chicks, I ended up on a blind double date with Rhode Island Red and a Miss La Fleche.
Actually, I've been going steady with them ever since. Not for the romance, you perv... I need the eggs.
Never heard of either company.
Downloaded bleachbit. Loved it.
Piriform may sick my duck.
This has been established over and over and over again in case law. Phone books, statistics and lists are not eligible for the type of legal protection being sought.
Information is being made available by the public to the public. Part of that public includes a commercial entity. There is no case here as far as I can see.
You're loading a third-party text file in a not-totally-arbitrary format into your app. Are you using any CCLeaner libraries?
What the hell has it got to do with CCleaner, other than it just so happens that it can read the same sort of file?
What is Winapp2.com?
.ini file is actually intended for use in bleachbit??? This boils down to this situation.
Winapp2.com is the official website of Winapp2.ini, an addon for CCleaner, System Ninja, and BleachBit that adds support for over one thousand additional programs. For more information about the project, its authors, and the website, click on About in the site navigation.
So what this says is that the
Billy has cool toy.
Mikey plays with Billy's toy.
Jimmy also plays with Billy's toy.
Mikey is mad because Jimmy and Billy have more fun playing with Billy's toy.
Mikey calls Jimmy and says, "stop playing with Jimmy's toy or I'm going to beat you up."
Billy's toy doesn't belong to either of them, but they both get to play with it.
Not sure if I should be more angry that CCleaner pulled this stunt or that bleachbit fell for it.
I like Piriform. They make nice little Windows tools that are free but do the job reasonably well without having to resort to pirating larger commercial packages. This kinda of behaviour doesn't really help them in any way once it becomes public (as per the story). At least they were reasonably civil and didn't immediately threaten legal action for non-compliance.
Don't worry about it until they send you a cease and decist letter.
So competing does not necessarily means innovating, striving to be good, striving to accommodate customers. No, it includes hindering or sabotaging others who happen to offer products or services similar to yours.
However, I was kind of sure that the hindering and sabotage approach was a preserve of the biggies, say Apple or Microsoft. I was wrong: even swat flies like Piriform try it.
Piriform can relax, lucky they are: the publicity boost they are giving to BleachBit will have no lasting effect. BleachBit desperately needs a new interface and it seems they are genetically incapacitated to do it.
Give them the finger.
After reading this, I thought of three points:
Â1 winapp2.com is not owned nor the ini files were generated by Piriform as evident from disclaimer at the site.
"This website and its files are not endorsed or supported in any way by Piriform."
Â2 winapp2.com INDEPENDENTLY builds the .ini files and OFFICIALLY endorses BleachBit to use their script.
"Winapp2.com is the official website of Winapp2.ini, an addon for CCleaner, System Ninja, and BleachBit.."
Â3 Only Piriform clients are bound to Piriform terms, not Bleachbit if it does not directly use Piriform products or services. In this case, it does not seem so.
Thus, the letter is a tactics of raging fear to the competion, or say monopolistic business practice.
...you have two choices: comply or get a lawyer. Me, I would consult a lawyer to see what it would cost to fight these Nazi's and you can afford, go for it. But we must choose our battles.
Of course, I am not a lawyer and my advice is worth every cent you paid for it.
This is an intellectual property dispute and therefore already ugly.
Just tell them that you have prepaid legal...
They don't own the information they are complaining about. They are not the originator of the data you are importing. They have no right to complain.
Carry on as if nothing has happened.
Andrew,
First off, thank you for your efforts on this project. While I buy a healthy amount of commercial software (OS, video editor and games for the most part) I prefer to only run software from a trusted source. Yes this includes Microsoft and Steam, and while we all have colorful things we might say about them the fact is I pay them, they are huge and issues I do face with them are known to me. Everything else I simply prefer source access. Your project includes source so it is much easier to trust your software then an alternative that, judging by the look of the website, is likely to want to opt me in to Chrome or something else I would have installed already if interested. What really makes them seem a bit dodgy is that you know it is commercial yet the site offers no blockers to downloading. These guys wanna get their meat hooks into my workstation!
Well enough of the "your app is awesome and they blow" speech. One issue I see is that you automatically download it, from their forum, given their complaint. I suggest that you instead utilize the following link below as the winapp2.com domain does not appear to be theirs. I would first contact either Robert Ward or Shane Gowland to be polite. Perhaps even sharing a percentage of your donations with them to help pay hosting costs, Being community oriented they might just tell you to keep it and use their INI all the same. Abuse of community projects by for profit companies never sits well with those of a community mindset, but I think this was not Piriform's true intent. Typically a corporate bully sends the thugs (lawyers) in the opening round with a cease and desist letter, but their request could have been a bit more clear about their intentions.
You should contact them and make the required arrangements. Alter your code to use their site or if you are refused by them rewrite for manual download and import. Once you have released, if you had been using the piriform.com forum, write them a thank you for informing you of their desire to not use their server resources and let them know that your current release has halted such behavior from your application.
http://www.winapp2.com/Winapp2.ini
Then refer them to Arkell v. Pressdram.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Do I actually need a registry cleaner?
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
So it looks like the problem that Piriform has stems from a Ghacks.net article that details how to export information from CCLeaner and import it to Bleachbit. It violates ccleaner's TOS. That's great and all, but Bleachbit never agreed to the ccleaner TOS. Maybe Piriform can go after ghacks, but I don't see how exporting your CCleaner into the winapp2.ini format (which Piriform does not control) and importing that winapp2.ini to Bleachbit is Bleachbit's problem. That would be like someone writing an article about how to export an Excel spreadsheet to CSV and then using it in LibreOffice Calc. Then Microsoft going after LibreOffice.
I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
Looks like advertising to me, just ignore this jerkwad.
A good lawyer will give you an initial consultation for free. I sought out a lawyer for a contract dispute with my business and he gave me the advice I needed for free though I offered to pay. He said it was a simple issue and he hoped I would return to him in the future for something more complex.
When I read the site http://www.winapp2.com/, it seems that you have nothing to be afraid of (Winapp2.ini is described as an addon for CCleaner, System Ninja, and BleachBit that is not endorsed or supported in any way by Piriform). IANAL, but my 2p advice is to keep preciously a copy of the actual content of this site.
Simply refer them to the reply given in Arkell vs Pressdram.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Their "terms of use" may (or may not) form a contract between them and their users but you are not a party to that contract and so are not bound by its terms. If they believe that their users are breaching their contract by loading files created using their program into yours they need to sue their users.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Piriform.
The first thing that came to mind when I saw that company name was the problems I had a few years ago with a chronically tight piriformis muscle that, for long time, resisted nearly all my attempts to stretch it to gain relief. The problem with that muscle, when it decides to cramp up on ya, is that it, literally, is a major a pain in the ass.
Personally, I'd contact a lawyer with a background in "IP" law to write them a flowery letter that, in essence, tells them to stuff it. I rather doubt that their configuration files could be considered protected by "IP" law but you never know so it'd be best to let a lawyer look into it.
(Yeah... those quotation marks reveal a little something about my attitude toward the concept of so-called "intellectual property".)
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
It is complicated. He might have begun as a user of CCleaner, then decided to write his own software because he recognized deficiencies in CCleaner. It's not in the lawyer's interest to know about his history of using CCleaner.
IANAL, but I might start by arguing that writing the winapp2.ini importer does not technically require breaking CCleaner's TOS, so Louise's claim that "having written an importer implies that TOS is broken" does not hold. This is preferable because the argument does not depend on how BleachBit is actually implemented, nor how the guy has interacted with CCleaner in the past. Failing that, I'd ask Louise to clarify (1) what are the legal justifications that the TOS should apply to BleachBit, and (2) exactly which terms of TOS that BleachBit allegedly violates (otherwise I'm not obligated to read their full TOS). And then counter-argue these two points.
I once had a signature.
Considering that the winapp2 site specifically mentions BleachBit compatibility, they obviously approve of your use.
If there is some sort of legal issue with using the winapp.ini format (who knows?), chat with the winapp2 people and come up with a BleachBit.ini format. They obviously also like CCleaner (and have a large user base that likes CCleaner) so you can't expect them to toss CCleaner compatibility, so offer to create a BleachBit.ini to winapp2.ini perl/Ruby script (if it takes more than 15 minutes, you're doing it wrong). That way, the BleachBit.ini file can be the master file and winapp2.ini is just a derived work to offer CCleaner compatibility.
Problem solved.
Do they state their justification for this?
ISTR lawyers like to do that because (1) they spend more time crafting the letter, therefore $$$, and (2) it removes any ambiguity and keeps the recipient from being able to claim they didn't know why they were being asked/told/whatever to do something.
Dear sir /madam
I refer you to the reply given in Arkell and Pressdram
sincerely
>
Here's the history about the reply:
http://jackofkent.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/reply-given-in-arkell-v-pressdram.html
Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
From the winapp2.com site:
Winapp2.com is the official website of Winapp2.ini, an addon for CCleaner, System Ninja, and ...
BleachBit
Sounds like it's, you know, designed to work with both programs from the get-go, and CCleaner just wants to have less competition >.
At least counter sue you are spending the money any way harassment wire fraud what ever the lawyer can come up with.
Make it cost them too.
Please inform Louise Kinane that the article she based her request on has been changed; the authors of the article were mistaken, and her complaint doesn't actually apply.
Install Ubuntu in Android
This isn't the first time Piriform's played games like this. They also sent a letter to the guys at ninite (ninite.com), requesting they not auto-install their software. Perhaps a reasonable request, but it seems to me that this company is kind of an asshole...
When I tried to sell my RV, I ran across a scammer who tried to extort money from me by claiming "we had a verbal contract and you broke it".
We didn't. I called lawyer I found in the yellow pages, explained the situation; he told me "You're fine; the guy is an idiot and you don't need my services."
No charge.
Most won't charge you for the initial consult.
Lawyers are professionals with a code of ethics. Most of them are decent human beings.
OK, if you're curious, I put it up for sale, some guy called and said he was interested, but never agreed on a price.
Meanwhile I sold it to someone else.
Called the first guy to tell him "You never agreed to my price or made me a counteroffer. Somebody else made me an offer, so I sold it to them."
Seemed more polite than just not calling him back.
At that point he told me "Oh, I've made all kinds of plans and bought all kinds of furniture that will only fit in that kind of RV. We had a verbal contract and you broke it and I'm out lots of money. At least a grand. But I'll take $250 and a sincere apology; otherwise I'm going to sue you."
After talking to the lawyer, I told him "Fine take me to court. I called a lawyer and he says your complaint has no merit. If you found a lawyer to file this suit for you, give me his contact info & I'll pass it along."
And that was about the end of it.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
You definitely have a case. 5 years of child support is a pretty serious financial burden. I'm sure there is not a huge emotional burden of having to put up with a crying baby and potential ancillary costs of missed work opportunities. How much higher up the corporate ladder you could have climbed if you didn't have to take care of a child for the last 5 years?
I use CCleaner regularly and install it on friends PCs. Now I know about BleachBit which is opensource and works on Windows and Linux. Piriform have lost one customer here.
And, this is your professional opinion, Counselor? Oh, you're not a lawyer or even familiar with the actual jurisdiction we're talking about, let alone the law involved.
Funny thing, IAAL & I got modded down for pointing out what you just have.
While I agree that at first sight, BleachBit being a third party, would seem beyond reach, I'm left with a slight nagging doubt here (lawerly paranoia). Specifically, in some jurisdictions at least authorisation -the granting of permission by one non-rightholder to another in some way to infringe the rightholder's IP -is actionable (i.e. against the permission granter). Working on the presumption that CCleaners users in violating the ToS negate their license (and are thus infringing upon CCleaners IP), there is a slender thread here to bring BBit's actions in enabling that infringement into play. And one would be very interested in the specific wording of provisions dealing with technological circumvention measures.
Now I stress, this seems an extremely long bow to draw. Nevertheless, as I wrote above, "I'd like much more information about the facts of the case and the particular legislative framework in place in the relevant jurisdiction(s)," before I would feel entirely comfortable in giving the owl klear.
Periform, by doing this, just made BleachBit like 1000x's more popular.
And pretty much guaranteed a LOT of people will NOT actually BUY their other products...
Next time, get clarification - the specific temperature of 'hot grits' should not be enough to cause third degree burns.
Nowadays the metrosexuals call it Polenta.
Nowadays? The insult "polendina" for one whose hair is the color of hot grits has been around at least since Collodi wrote The Adventures of Pinocchio.
Is it really "asking for legal advice" to ask the peanut gallery 1. how to find a reliable lawyer in this specialty and 2. what one should know to make the most of his initial consultation with such a lawyer, in light of advice that one may have received under a similar set of facts?