5 ms·

It's serendipitous all these events are happening now for me personally. I was recently burned by a piece of very useful and well crafted software (closed sourc

by qmmmur 7y ago

It's serendipitous all these events are happening now for me personally. I was recently burned by a piece of very useful and well crafted software (closed source). I did a fresh install on my machine and went to find their website which to my dismay had completely disappeared! I followed whatever breadcrumbs were left and found a whole thing had happened while I wasn't paying attention where the copyright for this software was now in complete limbo and noone who had recently purchased a license could redownload it. This is allegedly where the software exists now. https://audiofile.engineering/ https://audiofile.engineering/ Which contains absolutely no trace of the program Myriad Pro. This is the discussion from kvr about it. https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=525534 https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=525534 On the plus side I doubled down and learned SoX which I wrap up in some python now and it's fast, open source and others can develop on my efforts.

Crinus 7y ago
This is why whenever i think about buying software i check if they have a DRM-free version for Windows. 99% of the time this ensures i'll be able to use the software for years to come even if the company shuts down.
Iv 7y ago
Proprieatary software are shortcuts, but infrastructure requires open source. That's the only durable software out there.
aznumeric 7y ago
Same thing happened with Tridef. The company went under, didn't release a free version of the software, and now people who bought it legally have to resort to using a crack.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  I've said it a few times, but it's worth repeating IMO: copyright is a deal, where a creator gets a time-limited monopoly in exchange for works entering the public domain. If a company have arranged things so their work can't enter the public domain (eg DRM) then they should not get copyright protection, fundamentally it's wrong to get the benefit of copyright without giving up your work to the public domain. This can be solved by a requirement to register an unhindered copy, whilst they're at it orphaned works should be made copyright free, IMO.
  - MereInterest 7y ago
    I'm glad to hear that others have the same opinion regarding software copyrights. I'd even go one step further and say that the source code must be included in that unhindered copy. Otherwise, the public's right to make derivative works from things in the public domain cannot be upheld.
    - TaylorAlexander 7y ago
      I’m all for reform. I’d prefer we drop the whole notion of copyright but if we can just get sane terms with real expiration I’m on board.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      The companies will say that they're still using parts of the old code in newer products covered by copyright, so this won't happen. Besides, we'd have to have copyright periods on software of 3-5 years, 10 tops, for software copyright to even make sense. Not 70+, which is longer than any recognizable computer industry ever existed.
      - MereInterest 7y ago
        I am assuming that this would be part of a wider reform of copyright. For the case you mentioned, already under current copyright law, creation of a derivative work does not prevent a work from entering into the public domain (albeit after an unconscionably long period of time). To prevent such a argument being made after the fact, source code should be placed in escrow at the time of publication, with copyright protection given only after it has been verified that the provided source code can reproduce the binary being protected. This arrangement would also protect the public good in cases where the original company has gone bankrupt, or where the source code would otherwise have been lost.
    - neltnerb 7y ago
      Is source code covered by copyright at all if it's never published? I thought that was the bare minimum. If they never release the source code at all, I think we're just screwed, legally anyway. The DRM was attached to your binary or stream (or book), not the original source material. We may not like it, but I don't think it's copyright you have to worry about when it comes to closed source code.

by qmmmur 7y ago

Crinus 7y ago

This is why whenever i think about buying software i check if they have a DRM-free version for Windows. 99% of the time this ensures i'll be able to use the software for years to come even if the company shuts down.

Iv 7y ago

Proprieatary software are shortcuts, but infrastructure requires open source. That's the only durable software out there.

aznumeric 7y ago

Same thing happened with Tridef. The company went under, didn't release a free version of the software, and now people who bought it legally have to resort to using a crack.

pbhjpbhj 7y ago
I've said it a few times, but it's worth repeating IMO: copyright is a deal, where a creator gets a time-limited monopoly in exchange for works entering the public domain. If a company have arranged things so their work can't enter the public domain (eg DRM) then they should not get copyright protection, fundamentally it's wrong to get the benefit of copyright without giving up your work to the public domain. This can be solved by a requirement to register an unhindered copy, whilst they're at it orphaned works should be made copyright free, IMO.
- MereInterest 7y ago
  I'm glad to hear that others have the same opinion regarding software copyrights. I'd even go one step further and say that the source code must be included in that unhindered copy. Otherwise, the public's right to make derivative works from things in the public domain cannot be upheld.
  - TaylorAlexander 7y ago
    I’m all for reform. I’d prefer we drop the whole notion of copyright but if we can just get sane terms with real expiration I’m on board.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    The companies will say that they're still using parts of the old code in newer products covered by copyright, so this won't happen. Besides, we'd have to have copyright periods on software of 3-5 years, 10 tops, for software copyright to even make sense. Not 70+, which is longer than any recognizable computer industry ever existed.
    - MereInterest 7y ago
      I am assuming that this would be part of a wider reform of copyright. For the case you mentioned, already under current copyright law, creation of a derivative work does not prevent a work from entering into the public domain (albeit after an unconscionably long period of time). To prevent such a argument being made after the fact, source code should be placed in escrow at the time of publication, with copyright protection given only after it has been verified that the provided source code can reproduce the binary being protected. This arrangement would also protect the public good in cases where the original company has gone bankrupt, or where the source code would otherwise have been lost.
  - neltnerb 7y ago
    Is source code covered by copyright at all if it's never published? I thought that was the bare minimum. If they never release the source code at all, I think we're just screwed, legally anyway. The DRM was attached to your binary or stream (or book), not the original source material. We may not like it, but I don't think it's copyright you have to worry about when it comes to closed source code.