On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 11:11:54AM -0400, Michael B.
Trausch wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Quandary wrote:
> >
> > I call BS. The Lotus 1-2-3 fiasco and the Apple
vs.
> > MS suit are the two things that come immediately
to
> > mind as legal precedence. You can't copyright a
> > "layout" (read: look and feel, menu structure,
> > screen order, etc.). If you are referring to
> > directory layout on the disk itself, I think you
> > will have a VERY hard time trying to argue that
> > it's copyrightable -- since layout is effectively
> > the command-line look-and-feel for a given disk.
> > You don't have to look far for proof on that,
> > either; moving between various *ix distros, it's
> > easy to get lost when one distro stores its files
> > in a different place from where you're expecting.
> >
> There was no direct layout issues there.
Yes, you are correct. My argument is that layout is a
subset of look and feel. Because menu structuring *is*
included in the l&f deal, and file hierarchies are
analagous to menu hierarchies, I argue that the ruling
applies.
> If you'd like to see an example such as what I've
> described, you may take a look at OpenBSD's use of
> this:
>
> http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq3.html#ISO
>
> This is something that the OpenBSD people
> (specifically, Theo de Raadt) have held for years to
> help use the law to provide a means of securing
> their distribution and making it official.
Has it held up in court? Thousands of bad patents are
filed every year, and if/when they go to court for
enforcement, they are discarded. That's patent law,
but the same concept holds for -everything-: just
because you -say- something is valid under the law
does not make it so.
> It is protected by Copyright because it is subject
> to Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 102, Paragraph (a):
>
> (a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance
> with this title, in original works of authorship
> fixed in any tangible medium of expression,
> now known or later developed, from which they can be
> perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated,
> either directly or with the aid of a machine or
> device.
(b) In no case does copyright protection for an
original work of authorship extend to any idea,
procedure, process, system, method of operation,
concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the
form in which it is described, explained, illustrated,
or embodied in such work.
I can copyright the following:
My filesystem layout. Copyright 2005, me. All rights
reserved.
/boot/
/dev/hda
/dev/hda1
/dev/hda2
/dev/hdb
/dev/hdb1
/etc/rc
No one is allowed to copy that text, but anyone is
allowed to implement the idea behind it -- i.e., a
heirarchal filesystem with the specified directories
and files. Well, directories and filenames are just
lists of strings like that on the disk, right? Thus,
are they not subject to copyright like my above
example? Well, using mkdir and touch (well, mknod ;),
I can come up with exactly that file layout, and dump
the exact same text (sans the copyright crap) using
find or ls. So... is it really the filesystem layout
that's copyrighted? No, it can't be, because I just
demonstrated how it could be duplicated by using the
implied procedure that was very clearly described by
the file listing. It is (as you put later), if
anything, that instance of the filesystem that he
created which is copyrighted.
> The file-system layout of the ISO image that the
> OpenBSD project has is not a "look and feel" of
> anything,
It is when I'm in a bash session, ls-ing and trying to
find my way around. Note that the lotus 1-2-3 issue
was about navigation -- key bindings. Having the same
file format layout is equivalent to having the same
key bindings or navigation.
> it is a particular layout of a filesystem image.
> Saying that they cannot copyright an image of a
> filesystem is like saying that you cannot copyright
> an image taken with a
[digital]
> camera: You cannot copyright the concept of ISO or
> JPG, for example, but you can copyright one
> particular incarnation of an ISO or JPG, in a
> particular pattern of bits, as a compliation.
Actually, this is an excellent example as to why
copyright both doesn't really work and is a bit silly
in the digital age: You're claiming copyright to a big
number. If I went to court and said, "I own 42 when
it's interpreted like so..." I'd be laughed out. Even
really important numbers (like mersenne primes, that
take a -lot- of work to find) can't be copyrighted.
We're drawing a line, therefore, that is totally
arbitrary. But I digress...
Making a digital copy of his ISO *might* be copyright
infringement (though I still doubt it). However, even
in the case that it is, I can make a layout that
exactly duplicates his (with mkdir & mv), make an ISO
that is completely identical, and NOT be infringing
his copyright by distributing it (according to my
prior arguments).
> Walnut Creek and other CD-compilations have done
this
> for years. The CD Compilation gets the copyright,
> not the general system.
I am not too familiar with Walnut Creek (I just
googled for it), but in a nutshell (groan), it sounds
like they trawl mailing lists, etc., put them on CD
and sell them.
Now, the reason this -isn't- legal is because they are
making copies without the consent of the author. It's
the offline equivalent to file sharing -- it's no more
legal for me to go out and trawl the web for MP3's,
put them on a disk and sell that as a compilation. The
fact is, I'm making copies of music that I may or may
not have the authorization to copy (depending on the
license, which is really where the whole meat of this
particular issue is). "Freely accessible archives"
give the -person requesting access to the page- the
right to download and view the contents; it does NOT
give that end-user the right to turn around and
redistribute it (UNLESS you download it, burn it, and
sell it under your Fair Use Right of First Sale,
repeating the process for each disk; this is a
loophole).
Caching proxies may also be illegal, but that's a
can of worms I don't want to get into...
Now, they may not have been taken to court, but that
doesn't mean that it's legal, nor that a judge
wouldn't find them guilty of copyright infringement.
> >
> > Again, I'm going to call BS. You don't get
> > copyright on an aggregation of work. If I went and
> > copied all the articles (and ONLY the articles)
> > out of a newspaper that ran only syndicated
> > stories, the real copyright owners would have to
> > come after me -- the newspaper could not. The only
> > way the paper could come after me is if I
> > accidentally copied content that (1) one of their
> > writers wrote as a "work for hire," and that the
> > paper holds the copyright to, or (2) I
> > inadvertently copied one of their trade/service
> > marks, implying their endorsement of the copied
> > content when no such endorsement exists.
> >
>
> Copyright on an "aggregation of work," as you have
> called it falls under Title 17, Chapter 1, Section
> 103, Paragraphs (a) and (b): Subject matter of
> copyright: Compilations and Derivative Works. See
> text:
>
> (a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by
> section 102 includes compilations and derivative
> works, but protection for a work employing
> preexisting material in which copyright subsists
> does not extend to any part of the work in which
> such material has been used unlawfully.
>
> (b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative
> work extends
*** EMPHASIS ***
> only to the material contributed by the author of
> such work,
> as distinguished from the preexisting material
> employed in the work, and does not imply any
> exclusive right in the preexisting material. The
> copyright in such work is independent of, and does
> not affect or enlarge the scope, duration,
> ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright
> protection in the preexisting material.
>
Which means that my newspaper example is spot on.
Since the look and feel of the paper cannot be
copyrighted (ordering of articles, number of columns,
etc.), and the articles are syndicated (i.e., the
paper gets a license to publish them, and doesn't hold
the copyright), the paper cannot come after me.
Well, they possibly could under some circumstances
(like if they edited an article), but this is again
assuming that they have done *nothing but aggregate*.
Translate articles to files, ordering of articles to
ordering of files, and paper to BSD, and the metaphor
is complete.
> >
> > I'm not a lawyer. If you can show me something in
> > copyright law (and, to be clean, I'm talking US
> > copyright law) that proves me wrong, I'll be happy
> > to either adjust my argument or, if I'm outright
> > wrong, eat my words. However, I have spent some
> > quality time with title 17 (looking for
> > loopholes), and I'm pretty confident that I'm on-
> > target.
> >
>
> Nor am I an attorney; however, it is a matter which
> I've conferred on in the past. The protections are
> there in the most basic of Copyright Law, also
> enforced internationally.
If I understand correctly, what is enforced
internationally is the Berne Convention, which I have
not read up on. I also believe that trade agreements
allowing for extradition are one of the other key
tools that the US uses to enforce copyright abroad,
though that statement's coming off the cuff and should
be subject to verification ;).
Excellent points; if you have any further refinements
or counterclaims, again, feel free to make them.
-- Travis
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/
Hi all,
This is the latest hacks I have for now. I will be out for a week so have fun.
hpoussin is a major help with the pnp code. I'm using it as a guide. Thanks
to hpoussin for making the ioctl code work. You will see some of my hacks, just
ignore them.
hpoussin found a bug in setupapi. I think we do not have cfgmgr32.dll so our
setupapi doesn't forward to it as it should.
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/create.c:30) UHCI: IRP_MJ_CREATE
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/create.c:41) UHCI: open HCDx successfull
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/devctrl.c:65) USB: IRP_MJ_DEVICE_CONTROL dispatch
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/devctrl.c:78) USB: IOCTL_GET_HCD_DRIVERKEY_NAME
(ntoskrnl/io/pnpmgr.c:66) IoGetDeviceProperty(80c37000 1)
(ntoskrnl/io/pnpmgr.c:164) KeyNameBuffer: 8cf9abd8, value HardwareID
(KERNEL32:lib/kernel32/mem/global.c:76) GlobalAlloc( 0x40, 0xAC )
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/devctrl.c:65) USB: IRP_MJ_DEVICE_CONTROL dispatch
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/devctrl.c:78) USB: IOCTL_GET_HCD_DRIVERKEY_NAME
(ntoskrnl/io/pnpmgr.c:66) IoGetDeviceProperty(80c37000 1)
(ntoskrnl/io/pnpmgr.c:164) KeyNameBuffer: 8ce28808, value HardwareID
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/devctrl.c:98) USB: IOCTL_GET_HCD_DRIVERKEY_NAME retur
ns 'PCI\VEN_1106&DEV_3104&SUBSYS_73401462&REV_82'
(KERNEL32:lib/kernel32/mem/global.c:76) GlobalAlloc( 0x40, 0x2D )
(lib/setupapi/cfgmgr.c:327:CM_Locate_DevNodeA) 0055fab0 00000000 0
Unhandled exception
Address:
76670ff4 C:\ReactOS\system32\setupapi.dll
CS:EIP 1b:76670b93
DS 23 ES 23 FS 3b GS 23
EAX: 00000000 EBX: 00000000 ECX: 00000000
EDX: 00000000 EBP: 0055fa5c ESI: 00000000 ESP: 0055fa64
EDI: 00000000 EFLAGS: 00000202
Frames:
76660000+10ff4 C:\ReactOS\system32\setupapi.dll
400000+3f73 C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
400000+1ddc C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
400000+1ba1 C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
400000+188e C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
400000+16d0 C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
77e50000+5196c C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
77e50000+51b38 C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
77e50000+3915f C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
77e50000+5196c C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
77e50000+5261a C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
77e50000+374df C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
77e50000+38c9f C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
77e50000+38dc5 C:\ReactOS\system32\USER32.dll
400000+14a7 C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
400000+1417 C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
400000+457f C:\ReactOS\usbview.EXE
7c800000+2eb83 C:\ReactOS\system32\KERNEL32.dll
(subsys/win32k/ntuser/class.c:114) Failed to lookup class atom!
(subsys/win32k/ntuser/class.c:114) Failed to lookup class atom!
(subsys/win32k/ntuser/class.c:114) Failed to lookup class atom!
(subsys/win32k/ntuser/class.c:114) Failed to lookup class atom!
(subsys/win32k/ntuser/class.c:114) Failed to lookup class atom!
(subsys/win32k/ntuser/class.c:114) Failed to lookup class atom!
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/uhci.c:479) UHCI: IRP_MJ_CLEANUP
(drivers/usb/cromwell/uhci/close.c:30) UHCI: IRP_MJ_CLOSE
Thanks,
James
ps hpoussin, go for it dont stop on my account! 8^D
On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 08:20:24AM -0400, Michael B.
Trausch wrote:
<snip>
> (Another aside: The Foundation can, at its
> discretion, create an official "layout" for the
> installer CD and then Copyright that layout, such
> that nobody else can use it. While it's possible,
> it can effectively "cramp" the software and
> innovation surrounding it, and it's not advisable.
> Others then must choose different "layouts" for
> their installers of their derived works, and this
> would require heavy modifications to installers and
> the like to find files in new locations.)
I call BS. The Lotus 1-2-3 fiasco and the Apple vs. MS
suit are the two things that come immediately to mind
as legal precedence. You can't copyright a "layout"
(read: look and feel, menu structure, screen order,
etc.). If you are referring to directory layout on the
disk itself, I think you will have a VERY hard time
trying to argue that it's copyrightable -- since
layout is effectively the command-line look-and-feel
for a given disk. You don't have to look far for proof
on that, either; moving between various *ix distros,
it's easy to get lost when one distro stores its files
in a different place from where you're expecting.
If you can show me legal precedence for your
statements, I'll be happy to reconsider my stance. I
assume if you're making these claims, you have
something to back them up, and I'm interested in
hearing what your support is.
<snip>
> A little bit about Copyright Law, now. A developer
> holds copyright to the portions of the code that
> (s)he contributed to the project, and that is all.
> The group that is responsible for putting it
> together, then owns the copyright on the layout, and
> so forth. So, if releases are the Foundation's job,
> then whether they claim their Copyright or not, it
> is, in fact, their Copyright. If someone other then
> the Foundation packages it for the ReactOS web site,
> then *THEY* hold the Copyright, and they can
> therefore claim that they are "the" Copyright holder
> for the Official Distribution of the ReactOS
> project.
Again, I'm going to call BS. You don't get copyright
on an aggregation of work. If I went and copied all
the articles (and ONLY the articles) out of a
newspaper that ran only syndicated stories, the real
copyright owners would have to come after me -- the
newspaper could not. The only way the paper could come
after me is if I accidentally copied content that (1)
one of their writers wrote as a "work for hire," and
that the paper holds the copyright to, or (2) I
inadvertently copied one of their trade/service marks,
implying their endorsement of the copied content when
no such endorsement exists.
<snip>
I'm not a lawyer. If you can show me something in
copyright law (and, to be clean, I'm talking US
copyright law) that proves me wrong, I'll be happy to
either adjust my argument or, if I'm outright wrong,
eat my words. However, I have spent some quality time
with title 17 (looking for loopholes), and I'm pretty
confident that I'm on-target.
Cheers,
-- Travis
Legal precedence (1-2-3, Apple vs. MS):
http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/6805/articles/int-prop/software-copyright.html
Title 17 US Copyright Law
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html
Hi All,
We have now reached our goal of $500 to file the paperwork to register the Trademark name and logo
of ReactOS in the state of South Carolina. The next step will be filing for the entire US which I
have to go to another lawyer on. I expect to do the federal paperwork, it will cost us about the
same but I don't know when that will happen so if you were just going to make a donation for the
Trademark stuff you can hold off. If anyone in the user community would like to make donations to
support general development causes let me know and I can start allocating funds for bounties. On
another note I have opened up a bank account for the foundation so if you don't want to use paypal
but you want to make a donation contact me and I can provide routing information.
Thanks to everyone that has helped with this! Even if you are not able to write code, your
donations, testing, translation, promotion and artwork for ReactOS help the project!
-Steven
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
hbirr(a)svn.reactos.com wrote:
>- Changed the calculation of the base address of an image section.
>- Removed some unnecessary members from section object.
>- Changed the allocation of a section object back to paged pool.
>
>
>
>Updated files:
>trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/include/internal/mm.h
>trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/section.c
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ros-svn mailing list
>Ros-svn(a)reactos.com
>http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-svn
>
>
>
Thanks Hartmut.
If you're up for it, here are the public NT structures used...maybe it
won't be a bad idea if we use them if it's not too much code change:
lkd> dt _SECTION_OBJECT -b
+0x000 StartingVa : Ptr32
+0x004 EndingVa : Ptr32
+0x008 Parent : Ptr32
+0x00c LeftChild : Ptr32
+0x010 RightChild : Ptr32
+0x014 Segment : Ptr32
lkd> dt _SEGMENT_OBJECT
+0x000 BaseAddress : Ptr32 Void
+0x004 TotalNumberOfPtes : Uint4B
+0x008 SizeOfSegment : _LARGE_INTEGER
+0x010 NonExtendedPtes : Uint4B
+0x014 ImageCommitment : Uint4B
+0x018 ControlArea : Ptr32 _CONTROL_AREA
+0x01c Subsection : Ptr32 _SUBSECTION
+0x020 LargeControlArea : Ptr32 _LARGE_CONTROL_AREA
+0x024 MmSectionFlags : Ptr32 _MMSECTION_FLAGS
+0x028 MmSubSectionFlags : Ptr32 _MMSUBSECTION_FLAGS
lkd> DT _CONTROL_AREA
+0x000 Segment : Ptr32 _SEGMENT
+0x004 DereferenceList : _LIST_ENTRY
+0x00c NumberOfSectionReferences : Uint4B
+0x010 NumberOfPfnReferences : Uint4B
+0x014 NumberOfMappedViews : Uint4B
+0x018 NumberOfSubsections : Uint2B
+0x01a FlushInProgressCount : Uint2B
+0x01c NumberOfUserReferences : Uint4B
+0x020 u : __unnamed
+0x024 FilePointer : Ptr32 _FILE_OBJECT
+0x028 WaitingForDeletion : Ptr32 _EVENT_COUNTER
+0x02c ModifiedWriteCount : Uint2B
+0x02e NumberOfSystemCacheViews : Uint2B
lkd> dt _SEGMENT
+0x000 ControlArea : Ptr32 _CONTROL_AREA
+0x004 TotalNumberOfPtes : Uint4B
+0x008 NonExtendedPtes : Uint4B
+0x00c WritableUserReferences : Uint4B
+0x010 SizeOfSegment : Uint8B
+0x018 SegmentPteTemplate : _MMPTE
+0x01c NumberOfCommittedPages : Uint4B
+0x020 ExtendInfo : Ptr32 _MMEXTEND_INFO
+0x024 SystemImageBase : Ptr32 Void
+0x028 BasedAddress : Ptr32 Void
+0x02c u1 : __unnamed
+0x030 u2 : __unnamed
+0x034 PrototypePte : Ptr32 _MMPTE
+0x038 ThePtes : [1] _MMPTE
lkd> dt _SUBSECTION
+0x000 ControlArea : Ptr32 _CONTROL_AREA
+0x004 u : __unnamed
+0x008 StartingSector : Uint4B
+0x00c NumberOfFullSectors : Uint4B
+0x010 SubsectionBase : Ptr32 _MMPTE
+0x014 UnusedPtes : Uint4B
+0x018 PtesInSubsection : Uint4B
+0x01c NextSubsection : Ptr32 _SUBSECTION
I think it's important because many of the Section implementation
details are documented in books (including driver-related books) and
known to driver developers who might be using the structures in their
code... I can name NT Insider, Windows Internals 4th Edition and Windows
NT File System Internals as some examples...but anyways it's just an idea.
There's even a nice diagram in one of the books:
As a sidenote, do we have a PFN Database? It seems so much of our Mm is
messy and old code that was written in a hurry to get ReactOS to work. I
dislike the abusive use of macros and the difficult to understand code
(imo).
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
hbirr(a)svn.reactos.com wrote:
>Changed back to the GPL.
>
>
>
>Updated files:
>trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/include/internal/mm.h
>trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/anonmem.c
>trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/marea.c
>trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/section.c
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ros-svn mailing list
>Ros-svn(a)reactos.com
>http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-svn
>
>
>
Hi Hartmut,
I had someone spend a week to update all our comment module headers and
make them the same and remove the old copyright headers. It was decided
that there would be one COPYING file in the root which is referred to by
the header, and that all the kernel files will follow the format which
is already in the files. Please don't start messing up the headers... if
you want to update the license/add one, the proper place is the COPYING
directory. Or else you're just undoing all the work that was done to
standardize the headers.
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
From: David Eckert <davy2002a(a)gmail.com>
I use IDE
Controllers
========
Standard floppy disk controller
Intel(r) 82371AB/EB PCI Bus Master IDE Controller
Primary IDE Channel [Controller]
Secondary IDE Channel [Controller]
Drives
====
QUANTUM FIREBALLlct08 06 [Hard drive] (6.45 GB) -- drive 0, s/n
392974120588, rev A05.0X00, SMART Status: Healthy
There was another drive installed but it stopped registering for some
reason (will fix this soon) and it is a 3.2gb drive.
On 6/6/05, James Tabor
> David Eckert wrote:
> > I have 2 harddrives hooked up but when I boot ReactOS on Live CD,
> > nothing works, only when i disconnect them does it boot properly...
> >
> > On 6/6/05, James Tabor
> > <jimtabor(a)adsl-64-217-116-74.dsl.hstntx.swbell.net> wrote:
> >
> >>David Eckert wrote:
> >>
> >>>I think the lack of large disk support is a real problem here, people
> >>>who download and burn the Live CD for example, MUST disconnect there
> >>>large hard drives (2GB or higher), I would STRONGLY urge the
> >>>development of large disk support to fix this problem, plus it would
> >>>also get to the issue of actually installing on new machines which
> >>>have no smaller hard drives on them.
> >>>
> >>>Best regards,
> >>>
> >>>David W. Eckert
> >>>
> >>
> >>Please need more info. I tested Ros with 120G, it did not have a problem.
> >>Even the ultra test, build Ros on Ros with a 120G.
> >>James
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
-David W. Eckert
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 06:50:18PM +0200, Hartmut Birr
wrote:
> Alex Ionescu wrote:
>
> > False... referring to the COPYING file is enough.
> >
> I think, we should change the header a little bit:
>
> /*
> * COPYRIGHT: ReactOS Team
> * LICENSE: GPL, see LICENCE in the top level
> directory
> * PROJECT: ReactOS kernel
> * FILE: ntoskrnl/ke/apc.c
> * PURPOSE: NT Implementation of APCs
> *
> * PROGRAMMERS: Alex Ionescu (alex(a)relsoft.net)
> * Phillip Susi
> * ...
> */
>
> because copyright and license are different things.
> Lawyers do like it to find such things.
You're missing the first year of publication.
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html