Fiddlingwith SFP and open devices.

Post by **hubird** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:37 pm

sonolive wrote: what do you need ? an answer ?

as i already told you :
fuck you and forget me man !

And this is not for other Pzians or anyone else, neither SLifers ... it's for you , man !

i've got nothing to do with you ! ok ?

cheers

olive

(bold/Italic by me).

sonolive · Post by **sonolive** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:38 pm

kool,
you finally understand !

next to nothing · Post by **next to nothing** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:57 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netiquette

kylie · Post by **kylie** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 1:24 am

hi eric,

digitalaudiosoft wrote: about law : using a software to remove a protection like time limit or anti piracy,is illegal : sanction is (in europ) 150 000 euros,but, if proof is made that you wanted to be malicious and voluntarily harm a company, sanction is 750 000 euros and prison.
in usa : 250 000 dolars and 2.5 years of prison.

1)
maybe I'm wrong, but all that was said was how to use the handle of a door that is not closed properly.
think of a car you see in the street. you see that the locking bolts are not down as they would have done if the owner locked it properly.
there is no law that could sue you to pay several 100k euros if you just pull the handle, take a look inside, stroke the fine leather (imitate?) seats, and then close the door again and give the owner a hint that the car is open (as far as I understand the thread this is exactly what astroman did. feel free to correct me with the right quotes that he really did something else).
if you actually take a seat, fiddle with the steering lock, and then start the engine and use it for your purposes (and go ahead with it), this is an entirely different situation!

my question here may be purely philosophical, but do you have proof that it is illegal to tell how to pull the handle of the car door that is not locked? yes, even if it is not nice to tell in the public from your point of view.

2)
removing the protection (if it is really done that easy, even in sfp) and then using software without paying is, of course against the law. but before you can sue somebody you definitely have to prove that it has been done. just taking a look at it is not enough for paying 100k euros, especially if no special debugging/reverse engineering software is used, but only the software which the device/plugin was originally written for. if this software has such a feature, it is not illegal, unless the software itself is proven to be illegal.
in germany, a software to copy protected cds and dvds is illegal, because the main purpose to use it is (as they say) to make copies of media that you can't copy otherwise because of the protection.
scope sfp is not mainly there for unprotecting devices (especially given the fact that (if its true what is said here) you can only look at them if they are not protected properly), but for using devices, be they protected or not.

I would therefore suggest that, should you have no proof that your devices actually are being used illegally, you'd better put all your energy and strength into the development of your devices (which I, like katano, like and use with an official license and paid properly for, without having even the intention to either take a look at the insides or removing a protection, since the keys provided by cw unlocked them already properly).

as long as there are olny rumours and no proof, the arm of the law is not as long as one might expect. spreading false rumours is conflicting with the law as well, btw.

think of it, consider your possibilities, and then act.
if you succeed, well. if not, don't blame the forum that you haven't been warned to consider and think about it well before.

-greetings, markus-

ps. ...a paying customer.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:19 am

in legal context there's a slightly different argumentatiom, as Eric correctly quotes ...if proof is made that you wanted to be malicious and voluntarily harm a company..., which means you publish a 'method' and suggest people abuse the software.

Permanently using a demo is 'abuse' and thus preventing sales is economic 'damage', so I might well face a lawsuit for the statement ...
...if Eric himself hadn't mentioned the possibility of removing the demo protection module by opening the device a day earlier.
In my (first) answer to Counterparts I explicitely referred to this post and that there wouldn't be any need to keep it disclosed ...because the cat's out of the bag anyway...

I would never start something like this myself, let alone under an account that is easily trackable. That there has been no spreading of the news and modified devices in 3 months is evidence enough that I sticked to my words given in the new years greeting to Olive. We should really get over this now.

I don't appreciate the accumulation of certain words known in context with w*rez on a board that has a high google ranking and a great reputation.
I also kind of regret that my response draw additional attention on 'fiddling' with something - it that sense it was (unfortunately) an 'over'reaction.
Sure - there was a certain dissing of members, but eventually that's just calling someone names, which seems to happen from time to time...

cheers, Tom

kylie · Post by **kylie** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 3:55 am

well, ok.

I started considering myself somehow half informed, and right before accusing somebody (whoever) of telling a modified version of truth I'd like to have answers to the following question (I'm fine with pm, if the content is considered to be legally relevant if published):

1) is there proof that there are (or were) devices around that can be loaded within SFP in a way that some graphical representation of their innermost structure is revealed, and all without using methods that sfp doesn't provide anyway?

2) is there a difference between devices that are protected from viewing correctly and devices who are protected only to a certain level, according to what is subject in question 1) ?

3) has the hiding of the internal view to do with the protection of a device, at all? or is this something different?

4) is, thus, sfp an instrument for software pirates, or is it just a host for devices who can or can not be viewed internally, if the developer takes action for making it impossible?

it's not about sdk here, this may be all different there. it's only about sfp, and what you are able to do with it.

the anwers to all that is, imho, crucial to decide if there has anything happened violating the law at all.

forget about the car, if you like. give me facts. proven facts. no rumours.

-greetings, markus-

tgstgs · Post by **tgstgs** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:12 am

spying out; using without licencs; figthing each other is not very helpful for a small plattform;

so i beg everyone to only use baught devices for scope;
in support of this plattform;

may all developers what color ever stay on the plattform and bring us new good devs to improof our music;

good vibes to all honest people here!

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:49 am

spying out; using without licencs; figthing each other is not very helpful for a small plattform;

so i beg everyone to only use baught devices for scope;
in support of this plattform;

As far as i am aware everyone here certainly does pay for their devices. i have never been offered dodgy Scopewarez and know of no-one that uses any.

However, you said it, it's a small platform, so where's the sense in DAS's continued attacks here on the main forum for an admittedly small maket to start off with?

tgstgs · Post by **tgstgs** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:12 am

i for me learned from this topic that platform is written with one t;

hope my post is red for peace and NOT to offend anybody;

i man can only speak for me not for any other member;

protect your devices carefully and love your brothers and sisters (at least one lady is member here)

good vibes from vienna

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:12 am

tgstgs wrote:love your brothers and sisters (at least one lady is member here)

That's just an urban myth i believe. This is a local place, no place for women - unless it's you tgstgs

Post by **garyb** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:14 am

wooohooooo!

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:13 am

great one, Mr. A

kylie wrote:...
4) is, thus, sfp an instrument for software pirates, or is it just a host for devices who can or can not be viewed internally, if the developer takes action for making it impossible?
... give me facts. proven facts. no rumours.

the answer to 4 is a clear NO
what has been discussed in this context is related to a very small number of devices only - and only to some 'demo' beep modules if they happen to be on the same 'level' as some (unnecessary foor runtime) objects which usually are removed before delivery to make the device smaller.
That way the 'feature' went unoticed for years.

It does NOT give you detailed insights and it is IN NO WAY related to the encryption/copyprotection that is applied to 'shop' devices.
There is NOTHING that pirates could make use of to tamper with plugins - you cannot break the protection of the key system for individual devices - NO WAY.

cheers, Tom

tgstgs · Post by **tgstgs** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:37 pm

Im bearded man - Austria Barbarian

but i met the myth and let me say , shes very pretty btw.

if i dont post the next few days my wife read this and i passed my ways;

-----
'This is a local place, no place for women '
no sense in translation sorry
but a lady would never post in a fighting topic thats for sure;
so please stay gentleman
----

hope the good vibes come back

Post by **garyb** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:11 pm

respect to your wife.

we need to keep it cool for the men as well. there is always the ring and the street for fighting. this forum is for scope and related.

thanks for speaking clearly about the issue(#4), astroman. indeed, i remember when the issue first came up years ago. this is the reason CWA gave up on "time out" demos. some smart *ss decided to get something for nothing, or noticed the possiblity and set off the alarm, just like this recent case. golly gee whiz! i almost thought that some new horribleness was afoot!

[organ music]
before this goes any further let me reiterate, Scope has wonderful 3rd party developers(including the touchy DAS!). support them by buying their work when you need something or when you can. as great as Scope is, it's still a small community. we all need to eat, even the people who you're mad at or are mad at you.
[/organ music ]

tgstgs · Post by **tgstgs** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:37 pm

'respect to your wife'

shes my sun im her shadow
but she could turn into a storm you know;

but thats another story . . .

Post by **garyb** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:17 am

my wife's cool too(my bassist), and she can be cranky(but not around me, that's my job in this house!), but she doesn't really care much what anyone says here on z....

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:23 pm

garyb wrote:
[organ music]
before this goes any further let me reiterate, Scope has wonderful 3rd party developers(including the touchy DAS!). support them by buying their work when you need something or when you can. as great as Scope is, it's still a small community. we all need to eat, even the people who you're mad at or are mad at you.
[/organ music ]

Sorry, but i don't put up with bad attitude and arrogance from people that pay me to work for them, let alone people who should want my money (which i have been told by DAS themselves they don't). Sorry to drag this down again, but i enjoy customer support, not being talked down to. If people want to eat then treat me right.

Post by **hubird** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 4:03 pm

yep...

with respect for Gary's (and also S4L's) attempts to cool down things, I don't see a (real) conflict not as something terrible.
The fight just has to be fought.
It's getting difficult tho if the party that wants to 'eat' (earn mony) does exactly everything that works against that.
It's hard to fight (or help) a 'suicide bomber', you can't use the concept of 'their own interest', as they don't seem to bother.

Myself, I will never buy a bread from a baker who's calling me names, and so I will never buy something from you know

--------------
I don't 'have' a wife to talk about, but I got my 'new' Elektron Machinedrum today, and the problem of static elektricity with the original one looks like to have gone, tho not for 100%, as I was able to let the leds blink by touching once.
Yet have good feelings, let's see if it will work in practice

j9k · Post by **j9k** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:08 am

i need a recap here sorry. wtf. no philosophicallity please.

j9k