Warp 3 source code leaked
Steve
found on the Gnutella P2P network the other day. He was
searching for OS/2 software when he came across a file named
"os2warp3src.tgz". He asked the person sharing the file if it
really was in fact the source code to Warp 3, and the person
said it was. So my friend downloaded it. Sure enough, it was the
source code for Warp 3. He was kind enough to let me download it
from him. I couldn't believe it. The thing I'm wondering is, who
could've leaked the source?
Steve
Christian Hennecke
Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
--
"I smell blood and an era of prominent madmen." - W.H. Auden
Andreas Kohl
Sorry,
We should not promote the theft of intellectual properties here!
Without knowledge about the proper development environment such sources
will not be useful.
Does Netlabs still exist?
Andreas Kohl
Christian Hennecke
> >>A buddy of mine was kind enough to inform me of a little gem he
> >>found on the Gnutella P2P network the other day. He was
> >>searching for OS/2 software when he came across a file named
> >>"os2warp3src.tgz". He asked the person sharing the file if it
> >>really was in fact the source code to Warp 3, and the person
> >>said it was. So my friend downloaded it. Sure enough, it was the
> >>source code for Warp 3. He was kind enough to let me download it
> >>from him. I couldn't believe it. The thing I'm wondering is, who
> >>could've leaked the source?
> >>
> >
> >Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
> >in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
> >
> Sorry,
>
> We should not promote the theft of intellectual properties here!
As we say in German: "Those capable of reading have a clear advantage."
This is not about stealing code but getting some helpful hints for
re-implementing stuff and fixing bugs.
> Without knowledge about the proper development environment such sources
> will not be useful.
> Does Netlabs still exist?
You are starting to *really* piss me off, Andreas. First your bickering
at commtalk.de, and now this. Go jump from an Ebola-infested volcano
cliff.
Christian Hennecke
<news...@weilbacher.org> wrote:
> > >Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
> > >in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
>
> While I can understand the curiosity, that would create a certain danger
> that code ends up in Voyager and other projects that is copyrighted by
> someone else.
Depends. It seems to be consent among developers that while the WPS
concept is really good, larger parts of the implementation suck big
time. Think of copying large amounts of files, for instance. Being able
to take a look at the original code could help with solving the problem
though.
> > Does Netlabs still exist?
>
> What's that supposed to mean?!
Netlabs bashing. Maybe because of the "Voyager" idea.
Stan Goodman
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:47:49 UTC, Andreas Kohl wrote:
>
> > Christian Hennecke wrote:
> >
> > >Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
> > >in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
>
> that code ends up in Voyager and other projects that is copyrighted by
> someone else.
>
>
> really exist, many other indeed think so, and this might pose a legal
> problem, yes.
The theft would occur at the moment that the copyright code is
actually used for commercial purpose. Reading copyright material
doesn't constitute theft, nor does learning from it. The suggestion is
that Netlabs gain insight into the structure and methods of Warp 3,
not that they copy or use the code.
There was a court case some years ago in which a company (called
Franklin, I think, but am not sure) was accused of appropriating
code, which was denied by the company. What helped decide the case in
favor of the plaintiff was that the idiot copier hadn't troubled to
remove the name of the original programmer that was embedded in the
code. Just having studied the code wouldn't have earned any damages.
The reason that there is indeed such a thing as intellectual property
is that society understands that most people that produce it are doing
so in order to pay the rent and buy groceries. That there is a
phenomenon of open-source software written by people who are already
supported by a day job is rare in history. If that were not
recognized, few authors would write books, plays, programs, etc.,
because they would be busy making a living. Certainly very few
companies would put out much money to finance either novels, reference
books, or films. Shakespeare, in particular, was in it for the money,
and he wasn't alone in that.
--
Stan Goodman
Qiryat Tiv'on
Israel
Jeroen Besse
> Does Netlabs still exist?
Excuse me?
--
Best regards,
Jeroen Besse
http://rblcheck.besse.nl/
(to contact me: the nospam address actually exists)
Wolf Kirchmeir
[...] Certainly very few
> companies would put out much money to finance either novels, reference
> books, or films. Shakespeare, in particular, was in it for the money,
> and he wasn't alone in that.
>
And he was one of the most successful ever, considering the size of his
market.
The notion of copyright was originally thought up to protect the
printer/publisher, not the writer. A book entered at Stationers' Hall
was considered off limits to other members of the Stationers Guild (the
people who sold books and other paper goods.) They could and did
prosecute rogue printers who printed unauthorised books, but the main
controller of printing was Elizabeth's government. Printing presses were
the internet of their time: a (relatively) cheap method of disseminating
all kinds of information. Governments have always wanted to control
information. That's why the freedom of the press was so important to the
writers of the US Consitution.
It took quite a while for the concept of copyright to develop further so
as to provide royalties for the writers.
© The OS/2 Guy ©
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:47:49 UTC, Andreas Kohl <ak...@web.de> wrote:
>
>>>>A buddy of mine was kind enough to inform me of a little gem he
>>>>found on the Gnutella P2P network the other day. He was
>>>>searching for OS/2 software when he came across a file named
>>>>"os2warp3src.tgz". He asked the person sharing the file if it
>>>>really was in fact the source code to Warp 3, and the person
>>>>said it was. So my friend downloaded it. Sure enough, it was the
>>>>source code for Warp 3. He was kind enough to let me download it
>>>
>>>>from him. I couldn't believe it. The thing I'm wondering is, who
>>>
>>>>could've leaked the source?
>>>
>>>Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
>>>in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
>>
>>Sorry,
>>We should not promote the theft of intellectual properties here!
Andreas is correct. The distribution of intellectual copyrighted
property without authorization from the author (IBM) is illegal.
> As we say in German: "Those capable of reading have a clear advantage."
> This is not about stealing code but getting some helpful hints for
> re-implementing stuff and fixing bugs.
And as we say in America "Assisting a thief in the distribution of
stolen goods equates to an illegal act."
Amazes me that so many eCS Lusers would advocate the theft of IBM's
property.
>>Without knowledge about the proper development environment such sources
>>will not be useful.
>>Does Netlabs still exist?
And, quite frankly Christian, you are advocating a crime and trying to
justify the crime as a benefit to all.
Geez, why don't we just break into Fort Knox and hand out gold bars to
our friends and family?
> You are starting to *really* piss me off, Andreas. First your bickering
> at commtalk.de, and now this. Go jump from an Ebola-infested volcano
> cliff.
Hum..... as an "editor" of VOICE Christian, perhaps you should read
your own employer's "set of ethics" as it pertains to living and
working within the business world.
You should be removed from VOICE immediately for making such public
threats.
--
Dr. Timothy Martin, The Official and Only OS/2 Guy
Warp City Web Site - http://www.warpcity.com
email: OS2...@Gmail.com OR eCS...@Gmail.com
Andreas Kohl
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:47:49 UTC, Andreas Kohl wrote:
>
>
>>Christian Hennecke wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
>>>in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
>
>
> that code ends up in Voyager and other projects that is copyrighted by
> someone else.
>
That's the problem with.
>
>>We should not promote the theft of intellectual properties here!
>
>
> While I do not believe that something like "intellectual property" can
> really exist, many other indeed think so, and this might pose a legal
> problem, yes.
>
This is big business... :-(
>
>>Does Netlabs still exist?
>
>
> What's that supposed to mean?!
I hope the guy(s) will continue to support os/2.
Good luck,
Andreas Kohl
Steven Levine
12/14/2005
at 01:42 PM, "Christian Hennecke"
<christian...@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> said:
>As we say in German: "Those capable of reading have a clear advantage."
:-)
>This is not about stealing code but getting some helpful hints for
>re-implementing stuff and fixing bugs.
This is more likely to be legal on your side of the ocean. On my side,
unfortunately, this would likely constitute infringment, unless one person
read the code and wrote the specs, and someone else did the coding.
There's also the usual license statements prohibiting reverse engineering
and such. In general, I consider this kind of dicussion purely
philosophical since it's almost impossible to estimate the risks of any
infringement that might actually occur.
Regards,
Steven
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Levine <ste...@earthlink.bogus.net> MR2/ICE 2.67 #10183
Warp4.something/14.100c_W4 www.scoug.com irc.fyrelizard.com #scoug (Wed 7pm PST)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© The OS/2 Guy ©
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:37:51 UTC, "Peter Weilbacher"
> <news...@weilbacher.org> opined:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:47:49 UTC, Andreas Kohl wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Christian Hennecke wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
>>>>in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
>>
>>While I can understand the curiosity, that would create a certain danger
>>that code ends up in Voyager and other projects that is copyrighted by
>>someone else.
>>
>>
>>>We should not promote the theft of intellectual properties here!
>>
>>While I do not believe that something like "intellectual property" can
>>really exist, many other indeed think so, and this might pose a legal
>>problem, yes.
>
> The theft would occur at the moment that the copyright code is
> actually used for commercial purpose. Reading copyright material
> doesn't constitute theft, nor does learning from it. The suggestion is
> that Netlabs gain insight into the structure and methods of Warp 3,
> not that they copy or use the code.
The illegal act would occur at the moment the copyrighted code is
distributed to another without the authorization of the owner, Stan.
Netlabs should contact IBM and seek their approval to receive a copy of
the copyrighted code to 'gain and insight into the structe and methods
of Warp 3..."
It is that insight and structure that is just as intellictiually
copyrighted as the code itself.
> There was a court case some years ago in which a company (called
> Franklin, I think, but am not sure) was accused of appropriating
> code, which was denied by the company. What helped decide the case in
> favor of the plaintiff was that the idiot copier hadn't troubled to
> remove the name of the original programmer that was embedded in the
> code. Just having studied the code wouldn't have earned any damages.
In the case cited above the company denied 'appropriating' the code.
The company did not distribute the code or the information.
> The reason that there is indeed such a thing as intellectual property
> is that society understands that most people that produce it are doing
> so in order to pay the rent and buy groceries.
No, any person doing it is doing so to benefit from the intellectual
property either personally or financially. The fact that a person
elects give his property away does not make its theft without his
authorization allowable.
> That there is a
> phenomenon of open-source software written by people who are already
> supported by a day job is rare in history. If that were not
> recognized, few authors would write books, plays, programs, etc.,
> because they would be busy making a living.
Not true at all. J. K. Rowling (author of Harry Potter) is a clear
example. She was *NOT* employed and was receiving welfare funds from
the British Government while she wrote her novel which she wrote for
the specific purpose of making money by having the novel published.
> Certainly very few
> companies would put out much money to finance either novels, reference
> books, or films. Shakespeare, in particular, was in it for the money,
> and he wasn't alone in that.
LOL! You live in a dream world. Let's take the same example about.
THOUSANDS of companies were vying for the rights to benefit from the
intellectual property of J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter - from movie
companies to doll makers. Each and every one of them put up front
money or offered to do so to develope movie projects, screenplays,
dolls, toys, etc., J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter character.
No matter HOW you came in to contact with anothers property it is
illegal for you to distribute such property for the benefit of yourself
or anyone else. It is your duty and ethical responsibility to return
the property to its rightful owner.
William L. Hartzell
Christian Hennecke wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:47:49 UTC, Andreas Kohl <ak...@web.de> wrote:
>
>
>>>>A buddy of mine was kind enough to inform me of a little gem he
>>>>found on the Gnutella P2P network the other day. He was
>>>>searching for OS/2 software when he came across a file named
>>>>"os2warp3src.tgz". He asked the person sharing the file if it
>>>>really was in fact the source code to Warp 3, and the person
>>>>said it was. So my friend downloaded it. Sure enough, it was the
>>>>source code for Warp 3. He was kind enough to let me download it
>>>>from him. I couldn't believe it. The thing I'm wondering is, who
>>>>could've leaked the source?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
>>>in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
>>>
>>
>>Sorry,
>>
>>We should not promote the theft of intellectual properties here!
>
>
> As we say in German: "Those capable of reading have a clear advantage."
> This is not about stealing code but getting some helpful hints for
> re-implementing stuff and fixing bugs.
>
>
>>Without knowledge about the proper development environment such sources
>>will not be useful.
>>Does Netlabs still exist?
>
>
The only way that having the source be useful was if Netlabs or anyone
else could have a team that would use the source to write technical
specifications for new code and a different team of persons actually
develop the new code to those specifications. I don't believe Netlabs
has that many volunteers to make two teams. The two team approach is
the only approved way to prevent code pollution that would cause
copyright cases to be lost in court. I would hate for a team to develop
a replacement set of SOM classes, to have their work trash canned by
some court because no one could prove that copyrighted material did not
ended up in the final work. We already know that similar specifications
will result in similar code, such that we cannot chance that the court
will say it is identical. So can we take the chance that we lose? It
would be better to take the working product and reverse engineer it in
the process of developing a working specifications. Reverse engineering
is a legal method of code development, in spite of Microsoft's, etc.
EULA. BTW, proper development environment is available because IBM did
release SOM 3.0 beta with the development environment specified.
--
Bill
Thanks a Million!
Andreas Kohl
Christian Hennecke schrieb:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:47:49 UTC, Andreas Kohl <ak...@web.de> wrote:
>
>
>>>>A buddy of mine was kind enough to inform me of a little gem he
>>>>found on the Gnutella P2P network the other day. He was
>>>>searching for OS/2 software when he came across a file named
>>>>"os2warp3src.tgz". He asked the person sharing the file if it
>>>>really was in fact the source code to Warp 3, and the person
>>>>said it was. So my friend downloaded it. Sure enough, it was the
>>>>source code for Warp 3. He was kind enough to let me download it
>>>
>>>>from him. I couldn't believe it. The thing I'm wondering is, who
>>>
>>>>could've leaked the source?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
>>>in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
>>>
>>
>>Sorry,
>>
>>We should not promote the theft of intellectual properties here!
>
>
> As we say in German: "Those capable of reading have a clear advantage."
> This is not about stealing code but getting some helpful hints for
> re-implementing stuff and fixing bugs.
Surprise - I can read and realized.
>
>>Without knowledge about the proper development environment such sources
>>will not be useful.
>>Does Netlabs still exist?
>
>
> You are starting to *really* piss me off, Andreas. First your bickering
> at commtalk.de, and now this. Go jump from an Ebola-infested volcano
> cliff.
Please don't blame me and try to stay objective. What we (the remaining
os/2 users) need is more cooperation. I have huge respect to those who
contribute something to os/2. If you have a problem with my question you
could contact me via email. There's no reason for insults or religous wars.
regards,
Andreas Kohl
Andrew Stephenson
> A buddy of mine was kind enough to inform me of a little gem he
> found on the Gnutella P2P network the other day. [...]
By any chance, was the date on the (one?) file "April 1st"?
--
Andrew Stephenson
Steve
> By any chance, was the date on the (one?) file "April 1st"?
I think this is what they call "denial". What's so surprising
about it being one file? It's called an archive. Maybe you've
heard of the concept?
Ben Dragon
Is this the same Warp 3 source code that was going around four or five
years back?
It became the basis of an OS/2 clone.
That ended up being abandoned because of the illegal code cut n' pasted,
(if I recall correctly), right into the clone. I dont' think the source
code was the complete package though.
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-= B e n D r a g o n =-
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Andrew Stephenson
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 01:09:26 GMT, Andrew Stephenson wrote:
>
> > By any chance, was the date on the (one?) file "April 1st"?
>
> I think this is what they call "denial".
Nah -- that's a river in Africa.
> What's so surprising about it being one file?
It'd need to be a bleeding big file. One might have expected you
to comment on the size of it, for the sake of folks who lack high
speed download links.
> It's called an archive. Maybe you've heard of the concept?
Amazingly, I have. And I've heard of practical joking, trolling,
foolish mistakes &c. Maybe you've heard of those concepts?
Never mind.
--
Andrew Stephenson
Jan Danielsson
[---]
> Anyway, make sure Netlabs gets a copy. I think they might be interested
> in having a look at the SOM and WPS sources.
If it really is the Warp3 source code, then accepting it wouldn't be
a smart thing to do by Netlabs.
Have you completely missed the ongoing battle between IBM and SCO?
SCO are probably just on a wild acid-trip.. But let's say they
weren't; do you really think that IBM would behave differently if they
were in SCO's situation?
I don't.
Personally, I'm curious about the Warp3 source code, just as I am
curious about the Win2k source code.. But I'm not going to download them
since I would like to have a future as a developer.
I may not agree with the law in these cases.. But I'm not about to
risk going to jail or being sentences to pay astronomical fines just
because I don't agree with the law.
--
Kind Regards,
Jan Danielsson
Te audire non possum. Musa sapientum fixa est in aure.
dinkmeister
laying around. If anyone is interested, I might get motivated to dig up
some links.
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 16:17:17 GMT, Andrew Stephenson wrote:
:
John Small
<christian...@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:
> .... Maybe because of the "Voyager" idea.
What is "Voyager"?
--
John Small
(remove the z's for email address)
Jeroen Besse
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:59:57 UTC, "Christian Hennecke"
> <christian...@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:
>
>> .... Maybe because of the "Voyager" idea.
>
> What is "Voyager"?
http://wiki.netlabs.org/index.php/Voyager_FAQ#What_is_Voyager.3F