Protecting Bgl and Xml Source

[jvile]

Jon

I also have been wondering about this where my bgl's can be opened and changed.

In the past I have had designers decompile my bgl's and take out the approach code that takes countless weeks to write and then compile into their sceney and upload to various sites.

I have also seen designers extract bgls's from my zip's and use in conjunction with their files. Normally contacting the web site that is hosting their upload gets it removed but you can't police the entire internet.

I learned early on to insert what I call a fingerprint and add text statements to my compiled XML in case I have to prove some if not all my hard work has been plagiarized.

In the past all decompilers corrupted the code in some fashion but SDE is so good that it shows everything verbatim. I wish there was away the compiler scambled the XML when it was compiled so if you did not have the master XML it could not be looked at.

Any thoughts in order to protect bgl's that are based on freeware but with distribution limitations.

 

[jvile]

First, once the file could be decompiled, the user should be the jugde of his action;

That is fine if the user is using the decompiled bgl to XML for learning purposes so they can go write their own code.

I don't think you would feel the same way like I do when you find your hard work copied into someone elses scenery that is now Payware and they are making money off it.

That has also happened to me with my Kai Tak checkerboard curved approach code to the IGS 13 runway.

Second, others respectful and traditional decompilers do that since a long time ago, and there is no bad judgement on that;

Traditional decompilers have never decompiled a complete bgl properly and that has been my saving grace these last few years. It takes 2 different decompilers from 2 different authors to get one halfway desent Airport record until SDE came along. Each traditional decompiler corrupts certain portions of a bgl when decompiled and must be hand edited to correct the problems.

I think it's interesting to access those objects in order to create a user's library, so one can see those objects and decide if it's interesting to put them in his sceneries, manually or using OPT.

Over in the AFCAD forum I pointed to a link that already does this.

 

[scruffyduck]

Guys

I think we are dealing with a very important ethical issue here. I accept what you are saying Jose. It is a very valid point of view. It speaks to the ownership and use of firearms (obviously on a very very different level than we are speaking of here) However the manufacturers of fire arms are not generally held accountable for what people do with them. In the same way the designers of de-compilers can say (me included) I provide a tool, what you do with it is up to you. I think I say that in my documentation.

We have a very interesting example of this in the UK. It is legal to sell and buy Stills to make spirits and home. It is not legal to use them

So I think to make the mdl data accessible in SDE.


Jim

I will think about that. First it would not be difficult to mark a Bgl file created by SDE - as you know there are quite a few places in the format which do not appear to be of any specific use in the code. Keeping that if the file is de-compiled by another decompiler is where I have to think. Whatever it is would need to be passed through compiling and decompiling multiple times with different tools.


I have an idea though But I will not publish it on the forum right now.

 

[Phantoms]

That is fine if the user is using the decompiled bgl to XML for learning purposes so they can go write their own code.

I don't think you would feel the same way like I do when you find your hard work copied into someone elses scenery that is now Payware and they are making money off it.

That has also happened to me with my Kai Tak checkerboard curved approach code to the IGS 13 runway.

Traditional decompilers have never decompiled a complete bgl properly and that has been my saving grace these last few years. It takes 2 different decompilers from 2 different authors to get one halfway desent Airport record until SDE came along. Each traditional decompiler corrupts certain portions of a bgl when decompiled and must be hand edited to correct the problems.

Over in the AFCAD forum I pointed to a link that already does this.

Jim, the solution might be a program that would add to the BGL some corruption that has no effect in FSX, but would cause decompilers problems.

 

[scruffyduck]

Jim, the solution might be a program that would add to the BGL some corruption that has no effect in FSX, but would cause decompilers problems.

That is an interesting idea. I would have to think about it. Certainly with SDE it might be possible to add something in but, of course, it would need to work with any de-compiler and that would not be easy.

So I guess I could stop bgl files created using SDE from being de-compiled by it by using some of the spare space inside the file. That might go part way by offering designers some protection.

In fact since it would require a direct write to the Bgl file protection could be applied to any Bgl and that might cause a whole new set of problems.

 

[José]

Hi, all

I think many people, like me, come here to learn with the most experienced, reading their codes and applying to our particular situations, with non-profit goals in mind.

The enterprises that sell add ons should have their own professional staff and take care of their products, not us.

Ideas of restricting access to learning is against open source and internet objectives of distributing knowledge in benefit of all people around the world.

Thanks,

José

 

[scruffyduck]

Hi, all

I think many people, like me, come here to learn with the most experienced, reading their codes and applying to our particular situations, with non-profit goals in mind.

The enterprises that sell add ons should have their own professional staff and take care of their products, not us.

Ideas of restricting access to learning is against open source and internet objectives of distributing knowledge in benefit of all people around the world.

Thanks,

José

That is a very fair point but I do not think what we are discussing would affect learning, sharing information or the concept of open source.

The issue that prompted this is where freeware developers have their hard work used by others without prermission and sometimes in payware addons.

I agree that professional developers have the resources and methods to protect their products but most of us freeware developers do not have that and could not afford to introduce it without charging for our work.

Also I do think it is up to the individual to decide whether to share their information or not and most of us do that as you know.

 

[José]

What should one protect?

Hi, Jon

I suppose more than 90% of free developers work with code and objects published by MS in their SDK and compiled with their compilers.

Some people make their own objects in Gmax/3DSMax. The MDLs are their properties, but the code that put them on sceneries is not. If their work has a great value then they must protect.

Otherwise, most people like to share their creations and help others to accomplish that. The internet would not be what is today without free hearts and minds. And people like you have helped to maintain this flame shinning.

Regards,

José

 

[Phantoms]

Jose, I don't think we're talking about not sharing info. I think that some developers just don't want their code copied and inserted into someone else's work without their permission.

If a person wants to create something he has seen in someone else's work, all he usually has to do is contact the author and ask them how they accomplished it. Most author's are more than happy to share that info and help in anyway they can. But when their hard learned code is just copied and pasted into someone else's code there is a tendancy to feel like it's stolen, underhanded, etc. This seems to happen a lot and these people never realize that if they would of just asked, they most likely would have received the info on how without insulting the original author.

Personally, it doesn't matter to me if someone copies something I made as this is my hobby, not my job. But I understand those who it does matter too and feel they deserve the same respect.

-James

 

[scruffyduck]

James

I think that explains the situation precisely. If someone asks for my help then I will give it willingly, if they just take something then I feel used.

I have had several cases of people offering me source code to help the development of SDE. I am always humbled when that happens as I know how much work goes into creating it. I have only once asked for access to some code. The author declined but that is fine also. At this point I would not share SDE code - partly because of the effort involved but mostly because it is messy code right now and I want to get it tidy. With SDE it has always been the case that designers can use the library (with my permission of course) in their own utilities. Right now it is still changing so much that it is not really stable enough for third party use.

 

[rhumbaflappy]

Hi all.

I have avoided the problem by giving away everything I've done totally free, without any restriction... I even give source code away.

Oddly, I don't think any more of my stuff has been ripped off than anyone else's. But, maybe the quality of my stuff is so low that no one would want it!

Dick

 

[scruffyduck]

Hi all.

I have avoided the problem by giving away everything I've done totally free, without any restriction... I even give source code away.

Oddly, I don't think any more of my stuff has been ripped off than anyone else's. But, maybe the quality of my stuff is so low that no one would want it!

Dick

I think you are being far too modest Dick