3 ms·

Is there precedent for that holding in court? Saying something like "I put this unusual string in my software & it is also in theirs" seems pretty useless from

Is there precedent for that holding in court? Saying something like "I put this unusual string in my software & it is also in theirs" seems pretty useless from a legal perspective.

wingmanjd 4y ago
Don't some map makers put ghost towns or roads that don't actually exist in their own maps as a sort of fingerprinting method? Unless you actually visit that particular spot, one might not know and inadvertently copy the proprietary map data,
- meshaneian 4y ago
  > kgeist 8 hours ago > Reminds me of "trap streets" on maps: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
paledot 4y ago
On the contrary, that seems more likely to be understood by a non-technical audience than any amount of decompiler output. Doesn't replace the latter, but it certainly removes a reasonable doubt.
- sidewndr46 4y ago
  Yeah if the string is something like "I sidewndr46 am the copyright holder for this software", I can't really see how it would be possible for a vendor to say they just happened to put that in their own independently created product.
cma 4y ago
"Unusual string" seems a lot more innocuous than unusual string referring to the product as another copywrited work by name which contains the same unusual string.
kgeist 4y ago
Reminds me of "trap streets" on maps: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street >In cartography, a trap street is a fictitious entry in the form of a misrepresented street on a map, often outside the area the map nominally covers, for the purpose of "trapping" potential plagiarists of the map There's a section on legal issues in the article
- samstave 4y ago
  I thought the same thing prior to seeing your comment -- yes, these are basically the first version of watermarks... so cartographers could silently 'sign' their work and see who steals it.
intelVISA 4y ago
Don't see why not - police rely on fingerprints to track theft right? Not much different conceptually.
- sidewndr46 4y ago
  I'm not sure of the actual prevalence of police using fingerprints to track down theft. It is however accepted as a piece of evidence in various criminal courts, so one would expect it to hold up in a non-criminal court as well. The difference is I didn't choose my fingerprints nor did the police. It's also really, really hard to get rid of them OR to have someone else with the same fingerprints as mine.
  - btilly 4y ago
    It is prevalent. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Automated_Fingerprint_Identification_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Automated_Fingerpri.... That said, faking them is easier than you might think. https://web.mit.edu/6.857/OldStuff/Fall03/ref/gummy-slides.pdf https://web.mit.edu/6.857/OldStuff/Fall03/ref/gummy-slides.p... Incidentally the idea of fingerprinting really was popularized by Mark Twain: https://www.courthousenews.com/mark-twains-fingerprints/ https://www.courthousenews.com/mark-twains-fingerprints/
    - sidewndr46 4y ago
      What I meant by faking fingerprints was creating another living human being with my same fingerprints. It's obviously trivial to create fingerprint evidence.
      - btilly 4y ago
        It is not just that you can create fingerprint evidence. It is that you can create fingerprint evidence in normal interactions with fingerprint systems in ways that leave no other evidence, and are unlikely to draw scrutiny from nearby humans.
webmaven 4y ago
ISTR that one of the DOS lawsuits hinged on a couple of obscure strings and Easter Eggs buried in the code.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Saying something like "I put this unusual string in my software & it is also in theirs" seems pretty useless from a legal perspective. What evidence do you expect would be used for copying besides shared content?
- cde-v 4y ago
  A video of them pressing ctrl+c then ctrl+v
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    That would be nice, but the share of successfully litigated copyright cases that have video evidence of the act of copying, or something similar, is essentially zero. Heck, criminal jury convictions, despite the much higher standard of proof, very often don’t have “video of the act being committed” kind of evidence.
  - Rebelgecko 4y ago
    IIRC there was a Mac program that proved it was being infringed on because the knockoff software implemented the same Easter egg when a certain series of hot keys was pressed
bitwize 4y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Franklin_Computer_Corp https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Fran....
- justinclift 4y ago
  Broken url. Seems to be missing a required full stop on the end: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Franklin_Computer_Corp. Looks like the HN submission form is automatically removing it, unless you use a non-clickable quote. Heh. :(
wilsynet 4y ago
“I put this unusual string in my software” may be enough to get you to discovery. During which time, you can ask for the source code.
- vlunkr 4y ago
  This is the right answer. By the time anything goes to court there's going to be more investigation than looking at a forum post.
_a_a_a_ 4y ago
I can barely comprehend what you're saying. Of course it has legal standing in terms of likelihood of copying.

Is there precedent for that holding in court? Saying something like "I put this unusual string in my software & it is also in theirs" seems pretty useless from a legal perspective.

wingmanjd 4y ago

Don't some map makers put ghost towns or roads that don't actually exist in their own maps as a sort of fingerprinting method? Unless you actually visit that particular spot, one might not know and inadvertently copy the proprietary map data,

meshaneian 4y ago
> kgeist 8 hours ago > Reminds me of "trap streets" on maps: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street

paledot 4y ago

On the contrary, that seems more likely to be understood by a non-technical audience than any amount of decompiler output. Doesn't replace the latter, but it certainly removes a reasonable doubt.

sidewndr46 4y ago
Yeah if the string is something like "I sidewndr46 am the copyright holder for this software", I can't really see how it would be possible for a vendor to say they just happened to put that in their own independently created product.

cma 4y ago

"Unusual string" seems a lot more innocuous than unusual string referring to the product as another copywrited work by name which contains the same unusual string.

kgeist 4y ago

Reminds me of "trap streets" on maps: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street >In cartography, a trap street is a fictitious entry in the form of a misrepresented street on a map, often outside the area the map nominally covers, for the purpose of "trapping" potential plagiarists of the map There's a section on legal issues in the article

samstave 4y ago
I thought the same thing prior to seeing your comment -- yes, these are basically the first version of watermarks... so cartographers could silently 'sign' their work and see who steals it.

intelVISA 4y ago

Don't see why not - police rely on fingerprints to track theft right? Not much different conceptually.

sidewndr46 4y ago
I'm not sure of the actual prevalence of police using fingerprints to track down theft. It is however accepted as a piece of evidence in various criminal courts, so one would expect it to hold up in a non-criminal court as well. The difference is I didn't choose my fingerprints nor did the police. It's also really, really hard to get rid of them OR to have someone else with the same fingerprints as mine.
- btilly 4y ago
  It is prevalent. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Automated_Fingerprint_Identification_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_Automated_Fingerpri.... That said, faking them is easier than you might think. https://web.mit.edu/6.857/OldStuff/Fall03/ref/gummy-slides.pdf https://web.mit.edu/6.857/OldStuff/Fall03/ref/gummy-slides.p... Incidentally the idea of fingerprinting really was popularized by Mark Twain: https://www.courthousenews.com/mark-twains-fingerprints/ https://www.courthousenews.com/mark-twains-fingerprints/
  - sidewndr46 4y ago
    What I meant by faking fingerprints was creating another living human being with my same fingerprints. It's obviously trivial to create fingerprint evidence.
    - btilly 4y ago
      It is not just that you can create fingerprint evidence. It is that you can create fingerprint evidence in normal interactions with fingerprint systems in ways that leave no other evidence, and are unlikely to draw scrutiny from nearby humans.

webmaven 4y ago

ISTR that one of the DOS lawsuits hinged on a couple of obscure strings and Easter Eggs buried in the code.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Saying something like "I put this unusual string in my software & it is also in theirs" seems pretty useless from a legal perspective. What evidence do you expect would be used for copying besides shared content?

cde-v 4y ago
A video of them pressing ctrl+c then ctrl+v
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  That would be nice, but the share of successfully litigated copyright cases that have video evidence of the act of copying, or something similar, is essentially zero. Heck, criminal jury convictions, despite the much higher standard of proof, very often don’t have “video of the act being committed” kind of evidence.
- Rebelgecko 4y ago
  IIRC there was a Mac program that proved it was being infringed on because the knockoff software implemented the same Easter egg when a certain series of hot keys was pressed

bitwize 4y ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Franklin_Computer_Corp https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Fran....

justinclift 4y ago
Broken url. Seems to be missing a required full stop on the end: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Franklin_Computer_Corp. Looks like the HN submission form is automatically removing it, unless you use a non-clickable quote. Heh. :(

wilsynet 4y ago

“I put this unusual string in my software” may be enough to get you to discovery. During which time, you can ask for the source code.

vlunkr 4y ago
This is the right answer. By the time anything goes to court there's going to be more investigation than looking at a forum post.

_a_a_a_ 4y ago

I can barely comprehend what you're saying. Of course it has legal standing in terms of likelihood of copying.