Poll

What do you think is ok?

You should pay for everything.
18 (7.3%)
Tweaking hardware is ok, downloading or tweaking software is not.
22 (8.9%)
Tweaking hardware and software is ok, if it is mine I can do what I want.
157 (63.3%)
Everything is ok as long as it saves me money.
31 (12.5%)
Something else.
20 (8.1%)

Total Members Voted: 239

Author Topic: Stealing: The double standard?  (Read 122595 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #300 on: February 18, 2014, 03:29:27 pm »
You buy the hardware.  There is no agreement that can usurp this unless it is explicitly labelled a rental agreement, and you understand that it is a rental going in.  In the US, anyway.

The software, though, is different.  I can buy a Rigol scope and do anything I want to the hardware, no problem.  When I hack in software keys, I violate the software EULA, and I lose the right to use the software that actually operates the scope, while keeping the right to do whatever I want with the hardware.
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2183
  • Country: au
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #301 on: February 18, 2014, 10:59:45 pm »
What about buying a record from the 60's and playing it backwards to find those "hidden messages" :)
 

Offline NiHaoMike

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8973
  • Country: us
  • "Don't turn it on - Take it apart!"
    • Facebook Page
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #302 on: February 18, 2014, 11:30:42 pm »
The software, though, is different.  I can buy a Rigol scope and do anything I want to the hardware, no problem.  When I hack in software keys, I violate the software EULA, and I lose the right to use the software that actually operates the scope, while keeping the right to do whatever I want with the hardware.
So if the software bandwidth hack is "wrong", what does that make of the hardware bandwidth hack? It doesn't modify any code, but does more or less the same end result.
Cryptocurrency has taught me to love math and at the same time be baffled by it.

Cryptocurrency lesson 0: Altcoins and Bitcoin are not the same thing.
 

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #303 on: February 19, 2014, 04:13:13 am »
The software, though, is different.  I can buy a Rigol scope and do anything I want to the hardware, no problem.  When I hack in software keys, I violate the software EULA, and I lose the right to use the software that actually operates the scope, while keeping the right to do whatever I want with the hardware.
So if the software bandwidth hack is "wrong", what does that make of the hardware bandwidth hack? It doesn't modify any code, but does more or less the same end result.

I didn't say "wrong." 

Hardware modifications are perfectly fine so long as you do not distribute information on how to do it, or do it for anyone else.  You can only modify your own stuff.  Each person must figure it out themselves.  (You're not allowed to modify hardware you do not own, even with permission from the owner, and the term "modify" includes teaching someone else how to do it, or selling parts for that purpose.)
 

Offline vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7563
  • Country: au
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #304 on: February 19, 2014, 04:56:10 am »
Quote

I didn't say "wrong." 

Hardware modifications are perfectly fine so long as you do not distribute information on how to do it, or do it for anyone else.  You can only modify your own stuff.  Each person must figure it out themselves.  (You're not allowed to modify hardware you do not own, even with permission from the owner, and the term "modify" includes teaching someone else how to do it, or selling parts for that purpose.)

Well,golly gosh,gee whiz,you mean,all those "hints & kinks" columns in the Ham magazines over the last 80 years or so were illegal,when they referred to mods to commercially made equipment?

And as for the TV service guides that included modifications---nasty TV servicemen!!
To make it worse,they were modifying equipment which didn't belong to them,too!

I have been guilty of this,too,& the Boss even encouraged me in this crime!

"OK Officer,I'll come quietly!" ;D
 

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #305 on: February 19, 2014, 05:13:20 am »
I'm just telling you the law as I understand it.

No need to get all weird about it.

I hope those overreactions work out for ya.
 

Online EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 37664
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #306 on: February 19, 2014, 05:16:52 am »
Hardware modifications are perfectly fine so long as you do not distribute information on how to do it

How so?
Publicly publishing info on modifying commercial hardware dates back since before you and I were born.
 

Offline David_AVD

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2797
  • Country: au
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #307 on: February 19, 2014, 05:17:06 am »
(You're not allowed to modify hardware you do not own, even with permission from the owner, and the term "modify" includes teaching someone else how to do it, or selling parts for that purpose.)

Is that a real law in the USA? (references?)  Does it cover any "hardware" or just things like game consoles, etc?
 

Offline AlfBaz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2183
  • Country: au
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #308 on: February 19, 2014, 05:20:12 am »
(You're not allowed to modify hardware you do not own, even with permission from the owner, and the term "modify" includes teaching someone else how to do it, or selling parts for that purpose.)

Is that a real law in the USA? (references?)  Does it cover any "hardware" or just things like game consoles, etc?

Probably not on the same page but...
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/
 

Offline vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7563
  • Country: au
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #309 on: February 19, 2014, 05:51:27 am »
I'm just telling you the law as I understand it.

No need to get all weird about it.

I hope those overreactions work out for ya.

I don't think you do understand the law as far as hardware is concerned-----firmware/software is another thing.
If there was such a law,it would have been challenged by the ARRL,Broadcasting companies,Publishing companies,& various others.

Electronic equipment is routinely "modified",when obsolete components need to be replaced with modern "not-quite equivalents",or to add functions which were not initially present.

 

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #310 on: February 19, 2014, 05:52:29 am »
Hardware modifications are perfectly fine so long as you do not distribute information on how to do it

How so?
Publicly publishing info on modifying commercial hardware dates back since before you and I were born.

Current laws differ.  We're (well, I'm) not talking ham radios.  Like I said, modding hardware is fine.  Modding software is not.  I misspoke earlier, and you quoted it.  I'm very tired and my wife is furious with me for a misstatement, so I'm not thinking too clearly.  Anyway, I'm talking modern digital stuff; game consoles, mobile phones, etc.  I don't have an Agilent scope to read the EULA on, but if you do, or anyone does, I welcome correction.  Deep in there is very likely a very restrictive clause on what you can do.  Use of said software after breaking the EULA is considered theft.  Selling mods or information that others need to do the same is considered theft * number_of_sales.  This gets into felony territory almost immediately.

I'm just telling you the law as I understand it.

No need to get all weird about it.

I hope those overreactions work out for ya.

I don't think you do understand the law as far as hardware is concerned-----firmware/software is another thing.
If there was such a law,it would have been challenged by the ARRL,Broadcasting companies,Publishing companies,& various others.

Electronic equipment is routinely "modified",when obsolete components need to be replaced with modern "not-quite equivalents",or to add functions which were not initially present.

Yawn.
 

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #311 on: February 19, 2014, 05:55:42 am »
eh nevermind.  you're all right and i'm always wrong.  just ask my wife.  far out.  jesus christ i'm tired of this planet.
 

Offline David_AVD

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2797
  • Country: au
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #312 on: February 19, 2014, 07:07:12 am »
I don't have an Agilent scope to read the EULA on, but if you do, or anyone does, I welcome correction.  Deep in there is very likely a very restrictive clause on what you can do.  Use of said software after breaking the EULA is considered theft.  Selling mods or information that others need to do the same is considered theft * number_of_sales.  This gets into felony territory almost immediately.

Remember that sometimes not everything written in a EULA has a basis in legal fact.   :D
 

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #313 on: February 19, 2014, 01:41:20 pm »
Remember that sometimes not everything written in a EULA has a basis in legal fact.   :D

The same can be said of this thread.

Fine, I get it.  I know why people become hermits, now.  I already drink with the flies, might as well live with them.

If you are trying to say that I'm lying or mistaken, then call me a liar or call me wrong and be done with it.  I don't appreciate indirectness, it's not fair to me or any future readers.

If you're not talking about me and I'm overreacting, then this is just another example of how completely inept I am at social cues and social interaction.  Basic things even children understand.  Even when it's distilled down to text I get it wrong consistently.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 26756
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #314 on: February 19, 2014, 06:05:35 pm »
Remember that sometimes not everything written in a EULA has a basis in legal fact.   :D
If everything in a EULA had a legal base they wouldn't need to write the EULA in the first place... IOW: everything in there doesn't apply.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline uwezi

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 272
  • Country: se
    • GreenPhotons
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #315 on: February 19, 2014, 06:42:07 pm »
When I placed my vote I didn't understand that you were referring to re-enabling disabled/downgraded functions. What I was thinking about was more tweaking in the sense of adding own functionality to a product which I have purchased, e.g. adding a wireless transmitter to an electronic bathroom scale (a project on my long to-do list), building current amplifier front-ends for DMMs, but also connecting the "forgotten" serial connector on a handheld GPS etc.

Of course I understand the fact that today the value of the hardware itself is often little as compared to the firmware development cost, and thus companies may choose to cripple certain functions and sell the downgraded product for a lower price - actually: why? The company would not loose anything by shipping out the full version, because the firmware development cost has already been spent.

When it comes to software on the other hand, the crippled versions are often a limitation for the user to make profit from the software, e.g. the freeware version of Cadsoft Eagle. Obviously you get the full program code when downloading the software, but with the limitations of the freeware version - even if you wanted - you will hardly be able to develop profitable products. I find that fair, would even be willing to pay for a - for me - reasonably featured version of the software.
 

Offline photonpunk

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 52
  • Country: us
    • My Blog
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #316 on: February 19, 2014, 07:15:25 pm »
I hate the philosophy of "you don't own that, you're just renting it". To me, it is a ludicrous concept invented by lawyers who aren't particularly in touch with the real world.

If I give you money for something, or if I'm given something for free, and it is now in my possession, in my opinion (and regardless of whatever fine print was slipped in) I now own that item or software. And as such, I believe I have the right to modify it in anyway I see fit.
 

Offline nanofrog

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5446
  • Country: us
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #317 on: February 19, 2014, 07:36:25 pm »
I hate the philosophy of "you don't own that, you're just renting it". To me, it is a ludicrous concept invented by lawyers who aren't particularly in touch with the real world.
I'd say businessmen/entrepreneurs rather than lawyers came up with it. Lawyers just get hired to write the language in the agreements.  :box:  :P
 

Offline 8086

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1084
  • Country: gb
    • Circuitology - Electronics Assembly
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #318 on: February 19, 2014, 07:37:52 pm »
I hate the philosophy of "you don't own that, you're just renting it". To me, it is a ludicrous concept invented by lawyers who aren't particularly in touch with the real world.
I'd say businessmen/entrepreneurs rather than lawyers came up with it. Lawyers just get hired to write the language in the agreements.  :box:  :P

Quite.

Selling the same thing multiple times over is the holy grail of business.
 

Offline bronson

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 172
  • Country: us
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #319 on: February 19, 2014, 07:44:55 pm »
If I give you money for something, or if I'm given something for free, and it is now in my possession, in my opinion (and regardless of whatever fine print was slipped in) I now own that item or software. And as such, I believe I have the right to modify it in anyway I see fit.

Amen to that.  And that extends to electromagnetic radiation too.  If the CIA or DirectTV or space aliens choose to beam their signals through my antenna and receiver (and house and cat and body) then I can do whatever the heck I want with them.  It's crazy to claim that it's illegal for me try to decode it or play with it.

(buying decode paraphernalia is a gray area of course...  this tends to devolve into slippery slope and libertarian arguments and imo doesn't produce a clear answer).
 

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #320 on: February 19, 2014, 07:51:47 pm »
I hate the philosophy of "you don't own that, you're just renting it". To me, it is a ludicrous concept invented by lawyers who aren't particularly in touch with the real world.

If I give you money for something, or if I'm given something for free, and it is now in my possession, in my opinion (and regardless of whatever fine print was slipped in) I now own that item or software. And as such, I believe I have the right to modify it in anyway I see fit.

I agree with you, and the legal precedent of the ownership of ideas, as toxic as it is, is real, so there's a gap somewhere between what you and I believe and what people who derive a large portion of their income from intellectual property believe.  Unfortunately they have a lot more money for attorneys than you and I.
 

Offline mamalala

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 777
  • Country: de
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #321 on: February 19, 2014, 07:56:34 pm »
I don't have an Agilent scope to read the EULA on, but if you do, or anyone does, I welcome correction.  Deep in there is very likely a very restrictive clause on what you can do.  Use of said software after breaking the EULA is considered theft.  Selling mods or information that others need to do the same is considered theft * number_of_sales.  This gets into felony territory almost immediately.

Remember that sometimes not everything written in a EULA has a basis in legal fact.   :D

Plus, depending on which country you live in, and how the EULA is presented, the whole thing is invalid and non-binding. For example in Germany, you need to be presented with such agreements at the point of sale. Any kind of contract, license, etc., that is not presented to you when you buy the item is void. Furthermore, you always enter in a contract with the actual seller, not the manufacturer. So if there are any extra terms that the manufacturer wants to apply, the seller has to accept and make them "his own" first.

Any of that shrinkwrap crap, or other stuff that you can see only after you bought an item and opened the box, has absolutely no legal meaning over here.

Greetings,

Chris
 

Offline Rigby

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1476
  • Country: us
  • Learning, very new at this. Righteous Asshole, too
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #322 on: February 19, 2014, 07:58:18 pm »
Ok, but lack of EULA enforcement does not mean ownership of source code or patents which are implemented in the software.  (You still don't own it.)
 

Offline 8086

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1084
  • Country: gb
    • Circuitology - Electronics Assembly
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #323 on: February 19, 2014, 08:01:07 pm »
You could say, that if you own the hardware (there seems to be consensus on that point, at least), that you also own the arrangement of physically stored bits inside the hardware memories. Which by extrapolation would mean that you own the software present on the device.
 

Offline nanofrog

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5446
  • Country: us
Re: Stealing: The double standard?
« Reply #324 on: February 19, 2014, 08:28:08 pm »
Wow, you guys still arguing and going in circles eh!     how weird.
:-DD

Not surprising though IMHO, given differences between nations' laws.

In the US for example, the legality isn't clear at all (actual EULA language hasn't ever been challenged directly in a court of law yet, as defending attorneys have kept this from happening). From what I've seen and heard, companies are terrified of such an event occurring.

And I suspect for damn good reason (genuine chance it would be struck down).  ;)
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf