Re: [NTLK] Hacked WiFi driver

~~~ On 2007/01/09 11:03, Roman Pixell [GMail] at roman.pixell@gmail.com
wrote ~~~

>
> On 9 jan 2007, at 06.18, PaulMmn wrote:
>
>> He set his software on course, and posted a large sign thereon, "THIS
>> SOFTWARE HAS NOT BEEN ABANDONED; IT IS ON A COURSE I HAVE SET FOR IT;
>> ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TO ME!"
>
> please show me.
>
> seriously speaking, couldnt we ask someone who works with those
> copyright issues to claryfy what is legally correct? i know where my
> limit goes, but it seems like some ppl think that the law is more
> important. since this is about electronically distributed software, i
> guess its "international" law...
>
> / ®
>
>

If only the law on this (and many other matters) really were that simple!
In this instance, legislation is complicated and full of grey areas, and
various people have raised questions, some probably valid, some speculative,
that could determine which parts of the law apply and which do not. Because
of this I agree with Roman that if we want to know about the law, it's about
time we consult a real legal expert in this area -- whatever the relevant
area of law turns out to be.

A question here: has Hiroshi ever said he relinquishes his rights to the
driver? Or did he just say he's ceasing to trade it?

For myself, I'm mainly concerned about what I think the law can only faintly
represent: Hiroshi's moral right as a person to own and control the thing
he made. Along with that I'm concerned about what NewtonTalk becomes if we
join so much of the e-community in looking at one another's work
opportunistically.

I think some of what bothers me is that much of this thread only works if
the man is dead! I believe this has been mentioned before, but I want to
draw us back to it. Supposing that Hiroshi is alive and well, or even alive
and ill, why shouldn't we still respect his wishes? In the former case, he
may be simply exercising his wishes; in the latter he may be currently too
pre-occupied to bother with answering our queries. Either way, should we be
so quick to circle over him?

I've read a variety of reasons why we are justified in simply taking
Hiroshi's driver without further ado. Someone has referred to "the greater
good" as ample justification for taking someone else's software, someone
else has compared Hiroshi's driver to a cabin in the wilderness needed as a
life-or-death shelter, and we've had this whole thing of "abandonware"
(whatever that is in real life), now complete with what to me is a dubious
comparison with a car abandoned on the road and even the silly comparison
with a ship abandoned on the high seas -- complete with the picture of the
internet as "the high seas"... Aargh, maties, here be pi-rates!

The trouble with these comparisons is that they compare physical objects,
active ownership of which are physically demonstrable in a number of ways,
with an essentially non-physical thing that has its physical presence
primarily on the machines of those who buy/license it, and where
demonstrating active ownership is much less straightforward. In the first
cases, possession is largely (but not completely) co-terminous with
ownership; in the second case possession and ownership are almost (but not
completely) NOT co-terminous. UNLESS we respect the concept of intellectual
property, and in particular respect that a programmer has the right to
withdraw his property from the market if he wishes, without our permission
or contention, no Newton programmer will be able to regard his programs as
his own again. It may be that no Newton programmer will want to produce any
new programs.

Despite what has been said so far, I can't see that the ability to write a
driver obliges someone to let me use it, or that his refusal entitles me to
take it for myself by any means at my disposal.

As someone who doesn't yet have WiFi on my Newt but is considering it for
the future, I nevertheless would hate to see us take over Hiroshi's driver
for kinds of the reasons given so far. It feels all too much like "we know
what we want to do, now let's find a way to justify it". I'd be happier if
we did right by Hiroshi in a way that is transparently so.

IMO, we need to contact Hiroshi and make good with this, or else ignore his
work and write a new, independent driver.
 
Shalom.
Christian

~~~ ~~~ ~~~

NewtonPad: the computer of tomorrow ‹ yesterday.

http://homepage.mac.com/chodlang1/iMovieTheater16.html
(With thanks to Chod Lang)

~~~ ~~~ ~~~

Fight Spam! Join EuroCAUCE: http://www.euro.cauce.org/

Refresh yourself from our MUG: http://www.oxmug.org/

-- 
This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries
Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/