Print

[EverythingButAnAnswer]

[ipodder2003]

edited

[HSDEMONZ]

um.. he is right you know.. the news is about 2 weeks old.

So cut him some slack.. as he is right.

I heard about it before Toms' posted.. but normally don't care about that stuff. Sniperkilla today brought it back up to my attention.. with the pictures.. and I felt it warranted a posting at that point.

[powercntrl]

[ipodder2003]

Thanks for the post, as I probly wouldn't have known until even later.  I looked at the post date here, my fault.  That guy seems to be thread bashing in a lot of places, and I didn't even look close enough myself. I edited my post above.

I have a media center PC, and I was curious if the files were present on my PC as well.  Sure enough, wordpad revealed the truth.

[HSDEMONZ]

QUOTE (powercntrl @ Nov 24 2004, 02:39 PM)

This is actually closer to the whole issue of running binaries on the Xbox that were created with a pirated copy of the XDK.  MS isn't distributing pirated software or even pirated audio, running a sound recording through a pirated copy of SoundForge does not forfeit your copyright of the audio you have created.  It's like MS built a house using a hammer that was stolen from Home Depot.  The house is perfectly legit, but they owe Home Depot for the hammer.

Actually.. no.

It goes deeper than that. It's more like they would owe for the derivitive works produced with the software they didn't license.

The derivitive works being any files in the OS Retail packages that hack one or more files made with the pirated software.

This is the defence (partial) that Sony's corporate lawyers will put forth.

(assuming they bother)

Sony.. like MS.. has deep pockets.. and can run the court system equally as well. People who like to see giants clash will want to see Sony take on MS on this issue.

If left untouched.. it leaves the door open for other future instances of similar abuse.

MS could use someones elses third party WMV encoder cause it gets better audio compression and fidelity.. despite WMV being their house format.. if MS were to use someone elses product unlicenced and make these "other" WMV files with better compression and fidelity it's the same kettle of fish all over again. MS sitting bare assed on the face of others intellectual property and taking a crap.

Reason I mention the WMV issue.. is that I've had far better experiences with other peoples encoders than MS own encoder.. and I'm sure MS eyes those other encoders.. looking for algorythm's and whatnot they can mimic or lift outright. So much great software on the net isn't even protected..

[HSDEMONZ]

now.. finding these files is easy now that we know what string to look for..

wonder who else has used that same cracked copy to make audio files..

any bored enough to check their entire drives of *cough* software?

[EmperorPsiblade]

they are screwed now....  

[powercntrl]

QUOTE (HSDEMONZ @ Nov 24 2004, 01:51 PM)

Actually.. no. It goes deeper than that. It's more like they would owe for the derivitive works produced with the software they didn't license. The derivitive works being any files in the OS Retail packages that hack one or more files made with the pirated software. This is the defence (partial) that Sony's corporate lawyers will put forth. (assuming they bother) Sony.. like MS.. has deep pockets.. and can run the court system equally as well. People who like to see giants clash will want to see Sony take on MS on this issue. If left untouched.. it leaves the door open for other future instances of similar abuse. MS could use someones elses third party WMV encoder cause it gets better audio compression and fidelity.. despite WMV being their house format.. if MS were to use someone elses product unlicenced and make these "other" WMV files with better compression and fidelity it's the same kettle of fish all over again. MS sitting bare assed on the face of others intellectual property and taking a crap. Reason I mention the WMV issue.. is that I've had far better experiences with other peoples encoders than MS own encoder.. and I'm sure MS eyes those other encoders.. looking for algorythm's and whatnot they can mimic or lift outright. So much great software on the net isn't even protected..

And you wouldn't like to see that shot down?  I happen to think MS is in the right here.  If you write a novel in MS Word, whether you paid for Word or pirated it should have ABSOLUTELY no bearing on whether you can publish your novel.

Using an audio editor is not creating a derivitive work, any more than building a house is a derivitive work of a hammer.  The hammer was simply used as a tool in construction, no part of the hammer's design becomes incorperated into the finished product.  Extending this analogy further, it was probably wrong for me to compare this situation to the XDK since it probably incorperates MS's proprietary IP into the finished binary.

A wave file is audio data and a header with a codec descriptor and some plaintext comments.  There is no way any of Sony's proprietary IP would be put into a wave file.  While I agree MS should have to pay for the software, they do not owe "substancial infringing damages" because the wave files copyright still belongs to MS.  No musician would EVER use an audio editor with a licence that considered its output files to be a derivitive work.

[bucko]

[PITABoy]

i hope that they pull up some dirt on sony too i love MS but i'm always looking to get something free from them.

[Extreme Agony]

QUOTE (powercntrl @ Nov 24 2004, 02:39 PM)

running a sound recording through a pirated copy of SoundForge does not forfeit your copyright of the audio you have created.  It's like MS built a house using a hammer that was stolen from Home Depot.  The house is perfectly legit, but they owe Home Depot for the hammer. I think this makes some hilarious press, but MS really only owes Sony for one copy of Sound Forge.  If I go to RadioShack, shoplift a Mic and lay down a dope freestyle mix on my computer, compress it to MP3 with a copy of the LAME binary (which is in violation of patent laws, BTW) and post it online, it's still my song to which I hold the copyright to, regardless of the tools I used to create it not being properly licenced/paid for

QUOTE (powercntrl @ Nov 24 2004, 03:13 PM)

If you write a novel in MS Word, whether you paid for Word or pirated it should have ABSOLUTELY no bearing on whether you can publish your novel. Using an audio editor is not creating a derivitive work, any more than building a house is a derivitive work of a hammer. The hammer was simply used as a tool in construction, no part of the hammer's design becomes incorperated into the finished product. Extending this analogy further, it was probably wrong for me to compare this situation to the XDK since it probably incorperates MS's proprietary IP into the finished binary. A wave file is audio data and a header with a codec descriptor and some plaintext comments. There is no way any of Sony's proprietary IP would be put into a wave file. While I agree MS should have to pay for the software, they do not owe "substancial infringing damages" because the wave files copyright still belongs to MS. No musician would EVER use an audio editor with a licence that considered its output files to be a derivitive work

I couldn't agree with these 2 posts more.

The story is interesting and looking at the files with notepad to see the text in there is rather funny as well.  However, just as powercntrl stated, MS still owns the rights to the audio files, despite that they were created with a pirated version of the Sound Forge software...

Good story and discussion...  

[Baner]

Why are our Homebrews illegal? It's the same concept, a pirated program is used to create our own files. If I was caught releasing brew created with the XDK, would M$ not be able to press charges? Could I just say "You guys did it, I thought it was ok."?

[shanafan]

As long as MS continues to make me a happy user/gamer, they can do whatever they want to do. I am sure Sony has done bad business practices themselves too, but their tracks are covered.

[bourke]

The xbe files are different as they statically link in library binaries...

If you do not use the copyrighted M$ libraries then your xbe files are legit :-)


It's about time somone 'hacked' up some library files that do the same job as the M$ ones but that don't have their sigs on them ;-)

Shouldn't be too difficult :-P