Community Help: Protecting copyright - page 2
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I had decided to do #3 on my own, and have worked substantially toward protecting and providing as secure as possible distribution of protected work. The protection I envision would work 3 ways.
#1 Compiled binaries only (ex4 in this particular case)
#2 The binary would be directly affiliated with an obfuscated or hashed account number built into the binary.
#3 Binaries are individually compiled before download
Additional methods, like calling DLLs or processor ID tracking, or other means are not necessarily effective. I have done decompiliation before, hex editing, written optimized code in assembler, figured out network topologies by looking at client binaries, made edits to compiled programs (part of the assembler tutorial was changing the compiled version of notepad.exe), etc. All of this has taught me two things: #1 software shouldn't be insanely expensive #2 all client software protection can be bypassed. One of my jobs was working at a company that promised secure installations, people wrote their own installers.
I have prepatent materials for a cryptography based currency, using a modified implementation of RSA, some hashing, and some very strange recursive cryptography tricks. Is it perfectly secure? No. Is it secure enough? Well it would take several years (hundreds of years if all computers of the world had terabytes of memory) to crack one piece of currency that would expire in one year. I think that is "secure enough".
What are you really protecting? Is it the lines on chart? Are you protecting your control and the dependency of people to make fortunes on your ability to make a fortune on them?
Honestly, the way I approach this is that I make code that helps me trade. I give this away to other people because it makes them better traders - but only if my techniques are correct and they learn how to use it properly. Now other tools I make are often very useful, but require a great deal of additional work for other people to use them. They may work great, but are not very usable. If I spend 2 hours making a tool (NewHist.mq4) and then I spend 20 hours trying to improve the display, the layout, the colors, the flexibility without modifying code, etc... then I should package that to be sold.
(continued)
Sold to what end? To bring me riches? Well, if I write a forex tool that is really really good, then I don't need to sell it to make money. I would get enough money from using it to pay for its development and to reward me. So lets say I release NewsHist.mq4.
I can compile it, I can put restrictive licensing on it, but it derives value from updated data. Data that needs to be collected, organized and displayed. I won't secure the client, I'll secure the access to data. How much should I charge for this? Well I want to eat, pay rent, and spend more time writing Forex Code. I should charge enough to complete those goals. But increasing the cost decreases the number of sales. Maybe all I need is $500/mo to pay for that. I could charge $500 and hope for a single sale every month for me to eat, get insulin so I live another week, and pay for a room in a shared apartment. I could also charge $50 and hope for 10 customers, but this will be more reliable because sales are more predictable. Let's say that people are okay with paying $50, but they kind of grumble about it. Someone reposts the code, reposts the data, and sells the collection (with updates) for $20. Do I really care as long as I keep getting my 10 sales? Not really, my needs and goals are met. Do I care if they resell my code and don't provide data updates? YES. My name is on it, but the value is diminished. My integrity is at risk, because of someone else.
Now lets suppose that I release the code for $50, unburdened by any attempt at security. Lets say I get 15 sales per month on average. Great! What if I add a ton of security to prevent any piracy? Well if it isn't easy to use, my sales just went down. (Hence the account # included seamlessly on download idea.) What happens if sharing and piracy is fairly rampant, and my code gets passed around. The logic that many people have and legally claim is that I lost pirates * $50 as a cost. Real world data shows that sales go up.
An example: Let us say that I get my 15 sales each month. Lets say that another 30 new people are pirates each month. I get 45 new users each month. If I have to spend additional time supporting the pirates, then I'm loosing something. If I don't need to provide software support on stolen copies, I haven't lost anything. After a year, how many users do I have? 540 users total, 180 of them paid customers with support. In a truly linear world, that doesn't hurt me or help me.
We don't live in a linear world, we live in a logarithmically increasing one. "The Singularity is Near" by Ray Kurzweli makes this case *very* well, stretching back to origins of the galaxy. We live in exponential time. What tends to happen is that I gain new customers based on the natural log of existing users. Not "previous sales" but "existing users". This means those pirates end up selling my software for me through word of mouth.
The best users contribute more, they give back to the community that is created. Doesn't your logic dictate that you only take code, and don't give any? You receive the benefits of open source (and in your example above shared source) but keep your own source closed. I felt great about contributing a bug fix this week that all software of a genre was experiencing. 6 programs from 4 programmers, and they all had the same flaw that prevented their use with EURUSD and all other currencies under 1.5625. I benefited from the open source of people before me, by seeing how a problem was solved 6 ways. I took the most elegant solution, and improved on it sharing my work with the community that created it. Isn't that really valuable?
(continued)
Yes, forums do contribute to the problem of piracy. Open source has many copyright violations. I spoke with Hans Reiser about this, since his copyrighted code was being redistributed without permission as a commercial product. (He wrote an excellent filesystem, and file servers were using it by default. reiserfs.org) We spoke a little bit about protecting intellectual property versus solving issues. He had additional opportunities and benefits from having an open solution, specifically funding for the development of cryptographic extensions to his filesystem. Who benefits? everyone does.
There are a lot of takers, and a lot of givers. I think that Forex has a bit of the worst and a bit of the best. Honestly I don't like the programmer vs programmer mentality, because the real challenges are fighting brokers and avoiding getting crushed by banks aren't they? Who is the real foe? Your users (sanctioned or not) or the conditions that prevent us from being profitable?
Even if I never used any software from here, this forum increased my understanding, awareness, and alerted me to dangers. (IBFX for one, demo vs real account variations for another)
Piracy from the forum could be reduced by restricting downloads. I might not have been able to make the bug fix in that case. Some of our best users simply submit bug fixes. How could they if they couldn't view code?
I'll digress from the topic of "community value" and get back on the topic of this thread. Preventing copyright theft - not because it reduces our profits (it doesn't unless you're overpriced) but because it breaks the support line between user and programmer. That decreases value and smears our names.
Ebay is obligated by law to help us prevent this. Shouldn't we ask for that help? If we find a forum that offers decompiling for free, maybe we should ask them about value. Not about the value of the code, but the value of independent programmers. This is a problem with no perfect solution.
There is another foe - the thieves (unlicensed resellers) who decrease value, hurt our communities, sucker people for money, sell code without support or bugfixes, and do so without license, permission or sanction. Looking at that list, several programmers are guilty of these things too (especially no support, no bugfixes, suckering people for money, and diminishing possibly decreasing value). That is a battle to be fought simply by raising the standard.
Raise the standard, increase users expectations, and the battles will be won. There will never be a clear, decisive victory versus theft or piracy until a cryptographic platform and OS is created or it is all free and users expect it to be. In the meantime, we do what we can.
I'll fire the first shot right now. The Ebay user "esales2007" is getting an email...
I fired the second shot too, at the forum post you listed. I'm sending the emails to the appropriate email addresses and pulling the copy down now.
He was dumb enough to put his real address.
Here are some ebay transactions by him:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Amazingly-Accurate-Forex-Software-GBP-USD-20-50pips-day_W0QQitemZ180033302640QQihZ008QQcategoryZ47103QQcmdZViewItem
And his ebay profile:
http://myworld.ebay.com/strategicforex/
Account number 63744 at www.2checkout.com which has a copyright holder only restriction. They will be required to give copies of their sales receipts as evidence.
Of course, 2CO claims that they have no liability in this clause of the user agreement:
2CO ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FOR SUPPLIER'S FAILURE TO PERFORM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY RESULTS CAUSED BY ACTS, OMISSIONS OR NEGLIGENCE OF THE SUPPLIER, A SUBCONTRACTOR OR AN AGENT OF SUPPLIER OR AN EMPLOYEE OF ANY ONE TO THEM, NOR SHALL 2CO HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR CLAIMS OF THIRD PARTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, CLAIMS OF THIRD PARTIES ARISING OUT OF OR RESULTING FROM, OR IN CONNECTION WITH, SUPPLIER'S PRODUCTS, SERVICES, MESSAGES, PROGRAMS, CALLER CONTRACTS, PROMOTIONS, ADVERTISING, INFRINGEMENT OR ANY CLAIM FOR LIBEL OR SLANDER OR FOR VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT, TRADEMARK OR OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS.
but... that may not stand up in court, especially if they keep him as a customer after receiving any complaints at all
Sending off emails... anyone else on your hit list?
daraknor,
I am thinking now as forum administrator.
Just one question (not real case).
One person (developer let's say) had some idea. He tested this idea using MetaTrader during the several months. Then programmer came and programmed his idea onto indicator. Or developer asked him - does not matter. Programmer came and programmed idea related to other person.
And he typed his own copywrite as he, programmer, is the owner of the indicator.
Developer said: thats you very much. But I need alarm to this indicator.
Programme: this indicator created underyour idea is my property now. And to modify it you need to ask me, or to pay me.
daraknor,
I am asking as admin: how to protect the developers from programmers?
Because copywrite violation (when the or indicator is ready) is not usual case on the forum. You understand. When indicator (software let's say) is ready and copywrited so it is normal case. But as I know some programmers are collecting the ideas to program ideas to be the owner of them.
If this copywrite is the same with patented idea by some software so I think we should protect developers (people who are expressing ideas) by giving programmers to them who are connected with the forum to get form tsd copywrite.
Right?
And, may be, it is not good if many programmers are aroud or inside the forum? Because every forum is having forum programmers (for tsd copywrite) you understand ...
Here is the full list of links I have for this person. This post will be edited to add links when more are found.
https://www.mql5.com/en/forum
http://www.strategicsupportsystem.com/portal/index.php
http://www.strategicfind.com/
https://www.2checkout.com/2co/buyer/purchase?TCOID=6e1b9966facf1a60b88e2583b774d473&sid=63744&quantity=1&product_id=19
http://cgi.ebay.com/Amazingly-Accurate-Forex-Software-GBP-USD-20-50pips-day_W0QQitemZ180044958563QQihZ008QQcategoryZ47103QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZstrategicforex
(646) 827-9212 is a land line based in New York, NY The registered service provider is Focal Communications Corp (Reverse lookup is a paid service - but I can get full address information including elementary school grades)
Duharts in PA http://www.whitepages.com/10001/log_feature/search_suggestion/search/FindPerson?name=duhart&state_id=PA&search_suggestion=2&query_type=1424&parent_search_id=30051410343730118833
Nancy E Duhart in NY (does E stand for "Emerson"?)
http://www.whitepages.com/10001/log_feature/adv_search_w_email/search/FindPerson?firstname_begins_with=1&firstname=Emerson&name=duhart&housenumber=&street=&city_zip=&state_id=NY&default_listing=phone&listing=mixed&localtime=survey
This domain shut down, check google cache. http://64.177.222.206/index.php?ind=news&op=news_show_category&idc=2&st=20
Google Cache: http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:xFDegwI4rm4J:64.177.222.206/index.php%3Find%3Dnews%26op%3Dnews_show_category%26idc%3D2%26st%3D20+Emerson+Duhart&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2
Emerson Duhart previously operated "Strategic Equity Holdings" and http://www.strategichelpdesk.com/ (need to do due diligence on these)
Strategic Equity Holdings LLC at strategicfind.com
http://www.associateprograms.com/directory/home-and-garden/property/strategic-real-estate-solutions-l4763.html
Featured in news as being in New York http://www.cornermark.com/cmnewsdec98.html
Emerson Duhart formerly ran "ACE Financial Services" in 1998
646-435-0105 Previous phone number in 2003, also in NY http://www.forsalebyweb.com/nodiscount/discussion/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=329
Here are some resources provided by the Admin against copyright infringers on the previous post:
certain sections of forsalebyweb.com. They've even attempted to
alter the wordings of our registered copyright.
In addition to copying site testimonials, NATIONWIDETRUSTCOMPANY.COM copied word-for-word descriptions of our marketing process; renamed NoDiscount P-R-O-C-E-S-S to System P-R-O-C-E-S-S; and copied links used on forsalebyweb.com.
See scanned images of nationwidetrustcompany.com below.
http://168.144.132.89/vcr.htm
Please report websites with similar content to: support@forsalebyweb.com. You could be rewarded upto $1,000 if your tipoff leads to legal enforcement.
These sites can prove and track down infringers.
http://realtytimes.com/rtapages/20041013_webpirates.htm
http://www.Archive.org
http://www.copyscape.com
http://www.webconfs.com/similar-page-checker.php
http://www.faganfinder.com/urlinfo/
https://www.google.com ( use quotes around the copyright/trademark words )
http://realtytimes.com/rtapages/20041014_webcopyright.htm
Here is someone else tracing down Emerson Duhart http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:yfZcl39a-tcJ:www.reiplace.com/newsgroup/read.php%3Ff%3D1%26i%3D34595%26t%3D34571%26v%3Dt+Emerson+Duhart&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=14
*stretch* okay, back to code. I had my break and fun
Tools used:
Google on phone number, google on name
Clicking links in Ebay based on google
whois records
whitepages.com
wget was also used to make a copy of the website, all images, css files, movies, downloads and links with the following command:
wget -mEHxp -l 4 http://www.strategicsupportsystem.com/
daraknor,
Just saw your post in commercial section.
Great!
daraknor,
I am thinking now as forum administrator.
Just one question (not real case).
One person (developer let's say) had some idea. He tested this idea using MetaTrader during the several months. Then programmer came and programmed his idea onto indicator. Or developer asked him - does not matter. Programmer came and programmed idea related to other person.
And he typed his own copywrite as he, programmer, is the owner of the indicator.
Developer said: thats you very much. But I need alarm to this indicator.
Programme: this indicator created underyour idea is my property now. And to modify it you need to ask me, or to pay me.
daraknor,
I am asking as admin: how to protect the developers from programmers?
Because copywrite violation (when the or indicator is ready) is not usual case on the forum. You understand. When indicator (software let's say) is ready and copywrited so it is normal case. But as I know some programmers are collecting the ideas to program ideas to be the owner of them.
If this copywrite is the same with patented idea by some software so I think we should protect developers (people who are expressing ideas) by giving programmers to them who are connected with the forum to get form tsd copywrite.
Right?
And, may be, it is not good if many programmers are aroud or inside the forum? Because every forum is having forum programmers (for tsd copywrite) you understand ...I should start by saying, "I am not a lawyer, I am not allowed to advise about legal matters." On the other hand, I have a patent, I have filed for trademarks, I have researched copyright issues for digital libraries, legal cases, the DMCA, Fair Use Act, etc. So, I read a bit and have formed some opinions which I will share. They are however, just my opinions.
There are 4 main types of intellectual property. Copyright is "I presented information" and the act of presenting it means you own that presentation. This applies to code, books, ads, images, etc. The programmer 100% owns the copyright to this information because they were the sole writer of it. According to the WIPO there are two kinds of works based on copyright: a derivative work (like adding a patch, etc) and an inspired work. (I read a book, and wrote a book about it but didn't copy anything.) It is up to a judge to determine which one is the case. I could copyright my patches, and they couldn't be distributed without my permission.
The second kind of intellectual property (IP) is a patent. If someone has an idea, and can demonstrate that the idea hasn't been done before, that person can file a patent. The patent is per country, and only protects that process, idea, method, business practice, invention or innovation in that country. If someone files a patent in the US, the rest of the world can use that technology without paying any patent royalties or licensing. There are 120 or so countries that have an automated filing process for sharing patents. There is a burden of information with patents: You must demonstrate nobody had the same idea before you. That doesn't prevent Microsoft or other big companies from getting away with crap, but the burden would still need to be demonstrated in court. Patents are useful for getting funding, for intimidation (If i had a US patent and everyone in the UK was selling the same thing, I could threaten to extend my patent to the UK, etc), and so on. The courts will uphold patents, but if you need to actually do that then it is too late.
The third kind of IP is trademark, and this is the way something is presented, a style, a logo, or a phrase. Trademarks are reserved by industry. Trademarks also protect domain names.
Lastly, there are trade secrets. Nobody needs to explain their secrets, and they are treated as protected intellectual property.
Now... courts may interpret things in different ways. A court may say that if someone explained the process for doing something very very explicitly, that the code that does the same thing is a derivative work. A court *may claim* that if I took Windows 2000 source code and rewrote it in Python that Win2000-Python is a deriviative work of the Windows 2000 source code. I don't know of any court actually doing this, it would take a lot of research.
What tends to happen in the larger open source community (BSD, GPL, GNU, QPL, Mozilla License, etc) is that contributors are listed by what they contributed, and how important it is. Each member is acknowledged: artists, sound, people with ideas, major code writers, minor code writers, etc.
GPL deals with copyright by making all derivative works opensource and GPL. This is considered a "viral" license. But it prevents me from taking GPL code (or libraries) and writing minor patches and then calling it mine. On the other hand, that is exactly what microsoft did with the BSD network sockets. (MS stole TCP/IP code from BSD). GPL code requires all code, patches and modifications are open source as well. GPL code can be resold. QPL has a similar restriction on open source, but doesn't allow code to be resold at all.
My recommendation is that the person who comes up with the idea and the person who write the idea into code both decide on a license for distributing the copyright. They can use an existing license, or they can just write whatever they like. Without an agreement on the license, the code is probably the sole property of the person who wrote it. If the programmer is paid, the copyright is still owned by the programmer unless a contract specifically states otherwise.
Honestly, I think the best way to solve this problem is to create a reverse auction. There would be 4 types of people interacting with the system.
1. People with ideas. They would choose the type of license that the code will be eventually distributed in. If the license is too restrictive, programmers probably won't write the code.
2. Programmers who convert ideas into software. They may collect bids
3. Bidders are people who like an idea (with license) enough that they are willing to put up (or pledge a % of earnings) for the development of an idea. Programmers receive this money.
4. Council decides if the idea was properly coded by the programmer. If the idea is to be distributed in compiled binary only, the Council would have access to the source code.
There would be several more people outside the system:
A. Users who are able to share in the code distributed through a license (free, freedom, open source, compiled binary, paid for software, etc)
B. BountyHunters: research violations of copyright and ideas, might be paid for by the auction system. these people would be paid based on finding stolen ideas, and would also receive a % of any damages paid for idea theft.
C. Administrators: people who manage the system
D. Funds Escrow: Where the money is held before submitted bids are paid out
E. Money managers: (could be same as Fund Escrow) pay the BountyHunters, collect money for % based bids (like a managed account), do general accounting
F. Legal team: initially writes standardized contracts/licenses for development between idea people and programmers. May also enforce copyright violations brought by the BountyHunters. Can hire BountyHunters to collect additional information on violations.
This may sound very complex, but this thread is essentially a BountyHunter system. The Funds Escrow could be Paypal. The Administrators might be newdigital. Most of the existing forum members would fill roles 1-4 and A. Legal team is a lawyer, or someone who finds existing contracts now and hires a lawyer later. Money managers might be the same people who are on the council & administrators, but too much duplication and people might not trust them. (Like having everything run by one person who decides everything.) Ideally all members would have a known reputation.
Auction software may exist already, it would need to be culmulative though. An existing bit of code could probably be modified to work fairly quickly, with little to no database changes.
Right now, I would suggest that each programmer and Idea person just agree on a license. If code is submitted, a license should be stated in the file and/or on the download page. Please keep in mind that if GPL code is included, a binary file must be distributed in the same way as the source. We could have "elite only" GPL code, but the binary file and the source must be distributed at the same time. If someone takes that Elite Only file and reposts it somewhere else (like Ebay), they are allowed to do so only if the source is included. GPL code can legally be sold by anyone on Ebay but only if they include the source.
I think that's about the end of my long winded opinion...