|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
ZZ.
Heard of Copyleft? GNU saw what is needed, invented a very strong
legal condition for all their software, well ahead of its time. You
should be pleased with that. Check out with google.
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@xxx>
wrote:
>
> > Do you still remember the rise of the phoenix?
>
> No, didn't know that one but I like it .... it's a great story,
> thanks.
>
> My view is that 'copyright' is harder than ever to enforce in the
IT
> age ... companies should go with the flow ... what they lose on
the
> swing they can gain on the roundabout ... many don't seem to
> understand the new demographic even when is shoved in their
facebook.
>
>
> example:
>
> IMO instead of fighting file swapping music companies should get
on
> the bandwagon and release new bands at the garage level via
youtube
> etc ... margins on CD are very low anyway ... development costs
and
> risks are slashed on the net ... if the band ends up on a
gazillion
> cell phones then tour with them and make the money from concerts
and
> tee shirts etc.
>
> There are more ways than ever for talented hard working people to
get
> paid on the net ... why fight over old turf that the kids don't
want
> anyway.
>
> brian_z
>
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Paul Ho" <paul.tsho@> wrote:
> >
> > ZZ,
> > Do you still remember the rise of the phoenix?
> > Not the bird, but phoenix bios
> > When the PC was first created, IBM bios - heavily copyrighted,
was
> > successfully re-engineered by a very little known company. IBM
> didnt
> > succeed in stopping phoenix, because phoenix re-engineering team
> > consist of two sub-team, team 1 is allowed to see the bios, and
its
> > task is to re-engineered the specifications of the bios from the
> > source. team two never saw the source codes, but develop it
version
> > of the bios completely from the specs, Hence the birth of the
> modern
> > personal computing era.
> > You can never patent or copyright ideas. only implementation of
> > ideas, translating from pseudo code to actual source is not
> copying,
> > there are a lot of creativity involved.
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Would you make the same claim of ownership upon the works of
a
> > > > spanish poet simply because you paid someone to teach you a
> > foreign
> > > > language?
> > >
> > > Yes, I wondered about copyright of code compared to poetry,
prose
> > etc.
> > >
> > > Yes, I am respectful of peoples intellectual efforts.
> > >
> > > BUT!
> > >
> > > English is in the public domain .... AFL is owned by AmiBroker?
> > >
> > > I doubt if anyone can make it stick that I can't use AFL to
write
> > > anything I want to write.
> > >
> > > I imagine it is an argument that rages between and amongst
> > > programmers (individual and corporate).
> > >
> > >
> > > brian_z
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Mike" <sfclimbers@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In fact I find the idea of copyrighting AFL somewhat
> > > > ridiculous.....
> > > > > Tomasz created the language and I purchased the right to
use
> > it
> > > > when
> > > > > I bought AB.... all of it, in any way I see fit.
> > > >
> > > > AFL is simply a medium of expression, just as any spoken
> > language
> > > is.
> > > >
> > > > Would you make the same claim of ownership upon the works of
a
> > > > spanish poet simply because you paid someone to teach you a
> > foreign
> > > > language?
> > > >
> > > > You are free to compose your own works, and to reap the
> personal
> > > > rewards from sharing them. However, that does not give you
any
> > > claim
> > > > to the works of anyone else.
> > > >
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think that the larger question is protection of AFL's.
> > > > > > Anyway, I'd be interested in others thoughts on this
issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for raising the issue ... best to have an open
> > discussion.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am offended by the idea of copyrighting AFL code.
> > > > >
> > > > > I like Howard, and I quite like his book, but I didn't
like
> > the
> > > > fact
> > > > > that he tried to claim copyright of the code contained in
it.
> > > > >
> > > > > In fact I find the idea of copyrighting AFL somewhat
> > > > ridiculous.....
> > > > > Tomasz created the language and I purchased the right to
use
> > it
> > > > when
> > > > > I bought AB.... all of it, in any way I see fit.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am happy to share, for free, any code that I
have 'written'
> > if
> > > I
> > > > > feel is worthwhile and that I have the time to present it
in
> a
> > > > > reasonable way.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think you will have a problem copyrighting code because
you
> > > can't
> > > > > be certain that I haven't already written anything you may
> > write,
> > > > or
> > > > > claim to have written, and have it stored on my computer.
> > > > > Perhaps someone broke into my computer, stole the code and
> > gave
> > > it
> > > > to
> > > > > you .... I might have to sue you if you claim it is your
> > > proprietry
> > > > > code.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't have a problem with commercial activity though and
I
> > am
> > > > happy
> > > > > to consider purchasing plugins, books, training, financial
> > advice
> > > > > etc ... as long as the business is done at another site
and
> > only
> > > > > referenced, via link, from this forum.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Trading knowledge is another matter ... I would sell my
> > trading
> > > > > ideas, if it suited me, and I would attempt to copyright
the
> > > > methods
> > > > > (once again that would be difficult to do) but the code I
use
> > to
> > > > > express, or implement those ideas can't and/or shouldn't
be
> > > > > copyrighted IMO.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Re conflict of commercial/personal interests:
> > > > >
> > > > > I have experienced conflicting forces in this area.
> > > > >
> > > > > When I wrote for the UKB, and when I was considering
setting
> > up
> > > > > another site for AB users, I did have to weigh up the
benefit
> > to
> > > > > other users against the fact that I was essentially
working
> > for
> > > AB
> > > > > for free and building an valueable commercial asset for
> > AmiBroker.
> > > > >
> > > > > I still feel that way, even with this forum ... to me it
is a
> > > trade
> > > > > off between the desire to help others, and share trading
> > > friendship
> > > > > with them, while at the same time realising it is
essentially
> > an
> > > AB
> > > > > support desk and marketing arm.
> > > > >
> > > > > brian_z
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "bruce1r" <brucer@>
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Progster -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your response addressed DLL's and made good points about
> > > > > intellectual
> > > > > > property, but IMO you might have missed a point and been
a
> > > little
> > > > > off
> > > > > > the larger target.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that the larger question is protection of
AFL's.
> > This
> > > is
> > > > > > something that Howard Bandy and I discussed with Tomasz
at
> > the
> > > > > > conference in Feb. I'm going to delve into it a little
> here
> > > > > because I
> > > > > > think that it is time to air it again, then I'll offer a
> > quick
> > > > point
> > > > > > about DLL's.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Many have AFL's (trading systems, AND utilities) that
they
> > would
> > > > > > release if they could protect them. There are two
reasons
> > for
> > > > > > protecting the source - one obvious and one not so
obvious -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. To charge for the code and for the intellectual
> > property.
> > > The
> > > > > > market will decide if the price is reasonable or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. To protect the source. Many times others will mod
the
> > > source
> > > > and
> > > > > > then tie up author's time with questions about how the
> > original
> > > > > > software worked OR why the modified software doesn't
work.
> > > This
> > > > is
> > > > > a
> > > > > > real problem. I have released a fair amount of AB code
in
> > > another
> > > > > > venue and can relate this problem firsthand.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My impression is that Tomasz is reluctant to incorporate
AFL
> > > > > > protection for a couple of reasons. I won't try to
speak
> > for
> > > > him,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > I think that one of his reasons is that he feels that
> > protected
> > > > code
> > > > > > that possibly had a charge would impede the sharing of
> > code.
> > > To
> > > > > that
> > > > > > all that I can ask is - how much is not now being
released
> > > because
> > > > > > this facility doesn't exist. Howard and I and others
have
> > > tried
> > > > to
> > > > > > emphasize this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now to DLL's. Certainly code can be placed in a DLL to
> hide
> > > it.
> > > > It
> > > > > > is also fairly easy to protect it. It is just a pain
and a
> > > > > > productivity hit to convert AFL to a DLL just to protect
> > it.
> > > And
> > > > in
> > > > > > the end, any protection can be broken by a determined
> > hacker.
> > > > > > Protection tends to fall into two categories -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Wrappers for EXE's and DLL's that implement keyed
> > protection
> > > > for
> > > > > > existing binaries and require no changes. The
protection
> > may
> > > or
> > > > may
> > > > > > not be machine unique. For example, ASPROTECT
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. Embedded protection calls that require changes to the
> > app.
> > > > > Several
> > > > > > libraries available - some open such as ACTIVELOCK
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyway, I'd be interested in others thoughts on this
issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -- Bruce R
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "progster01"
<progster@>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The discussion so far on "Why so few?" DLLs seems
pretty
> > much
> > > > > > > on-target to me.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would add:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ability to program a non-trivial DLL is a marketable
> skill
> > > that
> > > > > takes
> > > > > > > a long time to develop.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are certainly a number of fine examples of free
> > > > > contribution to
> > > > > > > the AB community in the DLL area (e.g. RMath, for
one).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > One can only feel gratitude and appreciation for
> > such "above
> > > and
> > > > > > > beyond" contributions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, capable DLL authors have the same 24/7/365
> > > limitations
> > > > as
> > > > > > > everyone else, and must confront a simple choice about
> > > > how/where
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > spend their time and effort: getting paid, or not
getting
> > > paid.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Since DLL writing is (almost) platform agnostic, DLL
> > writers
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > trading area will have a tendency to code for
platforms
> > that
> > > > > provide
> > > > > > > built-in support for locking a DLL to a customer or
> > software
> > > ID.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would predict that such "commercializing"
integration
> > > > features
> > > > > would
> > > > > > > result in a distinct increase in the number of
commercial
> > DLLs
> > > > > > > available for AB.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
**** IMPORTANT ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
*********************
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
*********************
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
For other support material please check also:
http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
*********************************
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|