Slashdot Log In
Linux Drivers For Free Barcode Scanner Cease-And-D...
from the in-a-world-full-of-lawyers dept.
> How complicated is the driver/what does it do?
It isn't terribly complicated. There's two programs that I wrote in the package, and one I did not. All are based on the "libcue" I wrote, also in the package. The deocder algorithm is a simple modified base-64 XOR 67. Jean-Philippe 'JP' Sugarbroad figured it out, and Colin Cross wrote code based on it and made me aware of it. I re-implemented it for the learning experience. The program named "decode" reads in a line of output from the cuecat for stdin or as first argument. CueCat output looks like this:
<ALT-F10>.C3nZC3nZC3nYDhv7D3DWCxnX.cGf2.ENr7C3b3DNbWChPXDxzZDNP6.
decode splits the Cue output into fields separeted buy ".". It ignores the first field and runs the rest through the base64+XOR decoder. This becomes the first line output. Digital Converegence added some additional "encryption" to their Web service; their program takes the output of the cuecat and inverts its case befoe sending it off to http://[server].dcnv.com/CRQ/1..[activation code].04.[cuecat scan].0
[Server] can be a, o, s, t, or u. [activation code] is supposed to be the activation code you get from your registration, but can be simply "ACTIVATIONCODE", which is actually what my spftware puts there. [cuecat scan] is the raw output of the device, minus the ALT-F10, with case inverted. Their servers send back a little blob of text containing several fields, including a suggested URL and description. Libcue parses those out and makes them available to its clients. Here's the scan of an NADA car-guide book:
The output of decode looks like this
DATA 000000001768443202 IB5 978034533392650599
CUE 0345333926
AMAZON 0345333926
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345333926/104-2159322-9263954
Ringworld Larry Niven
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0345333926.01.LZZZZZZZ.gif
The gnome panel applet reads in CueCat scans, looks up the :Cue at DCNV servers, and redirects Netscape to the suggested site, if any.
> What does their commercial software do exactly?
The same thing mine does, without the amazon lookup and with some annoying GUI features, like a tabbed CueCat panel.
> How many lines of code?
1258 according to "cat cuecat-applet.c cuecat-applet.h decode.c decode.h libcue.c libcue.h | wc -l"
Michael makes another interesting point in a seperate e-mail
When they sent the letter (Aug. 30), my software did not touch the DCNV servers to look up :Cues. It simply decoded the data, and if an ISBN number was scanned, the panel applet made Netscape go to the Amazon page blindly: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/[isbn number here].
So it was not the use of DCNV servers they objected to, but the mere decoding of the output of the cuecat. I didn't release the :Cue and Amazon lookup-enabled version until yesterday (Aug. 31), when the FedEx letter arrived by overnight delivery.
Thanks to Michael for taking the time to answer this stuff. It's pretty scary when the stuff that you have can't be poked at without a corporation demanding you stop. Imagine if Ford had said you can't open the hoods of your car a hundred years ago.
Update: 09/01 02:49 PM by CT : Freshmeat has a perl script CueCat Decoder that will also decode the CueCat's output.
Update: 09/01 02:57 PM by CT : Russel Nelson pointed out that Lineo's Driver has also been taken down following a cease and desist from Digital Convergence (CueCat's parent).
BULL! (Score:3)
I agreed to NOTHING!
In short, it is mine to do with as I will. I can write other software for it, sell or give it to someone else, let my dog chew on it or take it out back and use it for target practice.
I'm surprised they found a lawyer who'd even write up the cease and desist as they don't have a case. It's been decided by the courts before, if you give something away for free it's no longer yours to control.
... and monkeys will fly out of my butt!!! (Score:4)
Decode spec (Score:4)
The encoding is a base64 (not MIME tho) with a random XOR thrown in. Each letter is a base 64 (6 bit) number, a is 0, z is 25, A is 26, Z is 51, 0 is 52, 9 is 61, + is 62, - is 63 (and fill in the blanks between there). A group of four of these 6 bit numbers are combined into a single 24 bit number, which is then split into three 8 bit ASCII codes (XORed with 67).
Taral corrected my first perl script to solve the short code problem. If a group of 4 characters is not complete (ie there are only 2 characters), it should be padded with 0's ('a' in the base64 encoding), and then follow the same decoding process. Then chop off the same number of characters from the decoded string that were padded onto the encoded string.
No tables/codes should be used anywhere - it is simply a coincidence that they work for numeric values, because the top 4 bits of all the number ASCII codes are the same, 0011 binary.
If you want to print your own barcodes I suggest the encoding called "Code 128". I found a company (Elfring Fonts) that sells windows fonts and software to make it easy to encode your own stuff: http://www.barcodingfonts.com/ [barcodingfonts.com]
---
Don Rude - AKA - RudeDude
Re:I suspect this is just a misunderstanding (Score:3)
At which point, the software for Linux is compariable to clean room interoperability (legal by DCMA) and to junkbuster. Both which are legal, AFAIK.
Even Worse: Digital Convergence Spies on You! (Score:5)
Every cuecat scan results in some garbage that looks like the following:
Hidden inside that code is the barcode type, and its numeric or alphanumeric equivilent. But there's more: There's also a serial number. And that serial number is probably easily matched up to the store where you picked up your cuecat device, or even to your name if you gave it to the clerk at the store.
The first item in the second line is the serial number. Then the barcode, and then the numeric value of the UPC type A code. This serial number stuff is real bad news. It's like a cookie that can't be turned off, and it gets sent to Digital Convergence every time you scan a barcode that brings you to a web site using their software.
Of course, they're going to be pissed about people using their barcode scanners without their spying software: They want to make money by seling your personal information. They know where you live. They know what books you read, and they know what products you buy, all by what you scan with their little cuespy.
The cease and desist letter they've sent is a vague piece of crap. Its sole intent is to intimidate. They have no legal standing. First spying, now intimidation tactics? I think perhaps it's time for a TLO to investigate Digitial Convergence.
I've mirrored the standalone cuecat decoder software at http://osiris.978.org/~brianr/cuecat/ [978.org].
They can't claim that last little sentance legally (Score:3)
(Just because it's in the boilerplate at any location, doesn't mean it's legit- loads of companies alike try to pull fast ones all the time!)
there IS no license agreement of any kind (Score:4)
they just handed me the Cue:Cat in a baggie
w/a CD-ROM, and a catalog. There is no legal
license agreement saying I have to agree to
anything to use the hardware - *ONLY* if you
install the software (on a Windows box) do you
have to agree to anything. I dont see where
they have a case here. Nothing is being
reverse-engineered, its only being decoded and
interpeted.
I'm going to write them - I was planning on
writing a review of the unit in conjunction
with the Sun PS/2 keyboard interface box and
Sun's PCi pc-on-a-card product for PCI-bus
SPARCstations (I actually got it to work).
Now, I'll throw it in a drawer, and put up
mirrors of this guy's code alongside my
DeCSS archives.
average people need to do more for themselves (Score:5)
Nader calls this Corporate Socialism. I'm beginning to think he has a point.
Some days I wonder if we're headed toward a society where you can't even wipe your own butt for yourself, instead of having some corporation do it for you (for a nominal fee).
If you did it yourself, you'd be depriving some butt-wiping company of revenue, you see. Putting honest, hard-working people out of jobs, for heaven's sakes!
(if you disagree, you're a communist butt pirate and should be shipped off for re-education)
This is severe hyperbole, of course, but unfortunately something very near that mindset is truly already out here in corporate-land.
Not a cease and desist (Score:3)
IANAL
Re:Read the fine print; they never "gave" it to yo (Score:5)
In addition, the item was not free, but given to me (and everybody else) for good and fair compensation, namely the personal information. It can be shown that this information has a monitary value (just look at how much email lists and snailmail lists sell for), and therefore the exchange could likely be viewed as a "sale" for the purposes of the uniform commercial code.
Software is a special case because it has labels on it stating that you are agreeig to a license, plus presents you with the license and a chance to repudiate the license and get a refund (in theory at least, when was the last time someone was able to return software they didn't like the license terms to, say, CompUSA).
So I think they are SOL unless you installed their driver software. Which I've never done. I've not even taken it out of the packaging.
P.S. If I were the author that got such a C&D letter, then I'd demand they get a whole lot more specific about what, exactly, was in violation. Such vague letters are easy and cheap to write and are meaningless in many cases because they aren't specific. Ask them for specifics. What, specifically, are they objecting to. What gives them the legal right to object to it (copyright claim, granted patent claim, trade secret, etc) so you have a chance to audit their claims. If they refuse, then you are in a much better position later if they file legal action against you.
Re:Here is a idea (Score:5)
They haven't a leg to stand on, and I doubt they'll even find grounds to sue.
Re:You missed the important part (Score:4)
Eh? Even if I were to accept the wildly controversial assertion that opening the software causes you to be bound by the license, there's still a big problem: just about everyone here (except for the Windows users) didn't open the software. The CueCat got plugged into the computer, and the unopened Windows software went into the trash, just like the Windows drivers disk that comes with most the hardware that we buy.
---
I suspect this is just a misunderstanding (Score:4)
So if your code looks nothing like theirs, they won't be able to prove that you violated their copyright by posting it, and everything will be copacetic.
Of course, IANAL.
And I'm glad I downloaded that stuff yesterday.
--
Cease and Desist doen't mean much... (Score:4)
Now, CueCat, I'm guessing is concerned that RadioShack will stop giving away the scanners because they can be hacked to work with competing barcodes. Thus they'll stop sending money to cue cat. But I don't see any legal basis for there case. I mean no copyrights were infringed, no licenses broken. Reverse engineering (outside of the realm of the DMCA possibly), is a long defended right. If CueCat does sue, I can't imagine they'd stand a chance.
That being said, if one cannot afford the lawyers and take the risk of being sued, then this may be a somewhat moot point (and you know cuecat is hoping for that). So, everybody get your check books ready, looks like we're gonna have to send some more funding to smack down the dumb corporations.
---
Re:Is My Javascript Decoder Illegal? (Score:3)
Can it be a loan if they mail it to you. (Score:3)
A friend of mine pointed out that Cuecats are being sent to various subscribers of Wired and Forbes and possibly other magazines as a promotion.
Now IIRC, federal law states that any unsolicited merchandise received by mail is a gift. This federal law would supercede any click through license agreement. It's no longer theirs, and you're free to do with the hardware as you see fit.
An email I just sent to info@CRQ.com (Score:3)
I am writing to express my utter disgust with your corporation's heavy handed
tactics against innocent programmers trying to use the CueCat on other
operating systems. The free CueCat software that has been developed and
posted to the Internet in no way infringes on your intellectual property. It
is simply a driver for the device! I am certain that no use was made of your
copyrighted material (i.e. software that came with the cuecat) to learn to
decode the cuecat's output. (It really is not a difficult thing to do simply
by analyzing the output of the device.) Also, note that users of the cuecat
are not required to sign any form of non-disclosure agreement so no
"intellectual property" could be released there. As for Trade Secrets, do you
think that someone broke into your property to steal a secret that could be
decoded by anyone with a pencil, paper, and a bit of time?
Obviously, we aren't talking about patents here or trademarks. So nothing is
left. Your use of the legal system to stifle free development of software that
supports your device is utterly reprehensible and you deserve to be sued for
harassment!
Re:IANAL: Do I have any obligation to these people (Score:3)
[cornell.edu]
US Code Title 39, Part IV, Chapter 30, Section 3009. Here is an excerpt:
(b) Any merchandise mailed in violation of subsection (a) of this section, or within the exceptions contained therein, may be treated as a gift by the recipient, who shall have the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender. All such merchandise shall have attached to it a clear and conspicuous statement informing the recipient that he may treat the merchandise as a gift to him and has the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender.
This section also references Title 15, Chapter 2, Subchapter 1, Section 45, regarding unfair business practices. I thing The barcode scanner manufactures could sue on unlawful distribution.
Re:Even Worse: Digital Convergence Spies on You! (Score:3)
If the only thing that have that's worth anything is the data, lets ruin the data. They're not paying us for data and nobody signed a contract guaranteeing accurate data, so let's screw it up royally.
There are many ways...
1) Random IDs, your stuff... Makes it look like tons of people use it once or twice and throw it away after scanning random stuff.
2) Random ID (singular), List of Stuff... Makes it look like tons of people own exactly the same things, usefullness depends on how many people scan the exact same list.
3) Random IDs, Barcodes of favorite products... Makes it appear that thousands of people are scanning the same products. What a way to boost your favorite band's sales figures, etc.
No scanner is needed for this, just an app that will make the appropriate net connection and report a given serial # and UPC code. Then lists of stuff we want to promote (hacker-friendly bands, O'Reilly books, etc) can be passed around for people to boost their sales figures.
Re:You missed the important part (Score:3)
FOUND IT! (Score:4)
The
If you want to view it yourself, check here [digitalconvergence.com] and go down to the third heading called "Permitted Uses and Restrictions". Read about halfway down that section, then be careful you don't hurt youself as your jaw drops into your lap.
Re:You missed the important part (Score:4)
From the Permitted Uses and Restrictions section of the CueCat license:
You acknowledge that the Software and :CueCat reader contain trade secrets and other proprietary information of Digital:Convergence and its licensors. Except as expressly permitted in this License, you may not decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, rent, lease, loan, sublicense, distribute or create derivative works based upon the :CRQ software or :CueCat reader in whole or part or transmit the :CRQ software over a network or from one computer to another.
[snip]
In any event, you will notify Digital:Convergence of any information derived from reverse engineering or such other activities, and the results thereof will constitute the confidential information of Digital:Convergence that may be used only in connection with the Software and :CueCat reader.
DISCLAIMER: IANAL
This leagalize does give them a leg to stand on. It's a matter of whether a court of law will find it enforcable. I guess it's a lot like the EULA. As long as Radio Shack employees aren't forcing anyone to sign an agreement, I think this license is unenforcable.
-Jennifer
The most effective action may be... (Score:4)
"Our company has received several of your CueCat scanners via Forbes recently and I would like to know whether you would prefer us to return them to you or to Forbes, or to just trash them. While there is some potential value in this device, your company's business practices are offensive enough that we have no desire to use them at this time (re: "Cease and Desist" letters to developers of Linux drivers for your device.) Better luck next time.
Sincerely,
etc etc
Then I sent this one to subscriber@forbes.com:
"Please stop sending the CueCat device to subscribers of Forbes magazine at XYZ Corporation. We find CueCat's business practices deeply offensive and will simply dispose of any such devices which we receive. As subscribers to your magazine, we find your association with these predatory and possibly illegal business practices to be deeply disturbing and we hope that your choice of business partners is merely an temporary aberration, not an indication of future trends. Thank you very much.
Respectfully,
etc etc
Possibly they can be educated, possibly not. But I won't do business with either of them until they demonstrate some enlightenment.
mjs
lame marketroid names (Score:5)
So, we have another case of the stupids (Score:3)
I can't wait until Burger King starts handing out free toys and then sends cease and decist letters to anybody using it for propping a wobbly table leg.
For crying out loud, this stupid instance will probably make it into court soon just like the stupid DeCSS case.
Why on earth do courts (yes, I know it is not in court yet, I am just proving that I am psychic;-) even bother to hear cases based on this crap?
Visit DC2600 [dc2600.com]
Re:What "intellectual property"? (Score:5)
screw this (Score:5)
I'm sending $100 to the EFF [eff.org] today. This kind of crap has got to stop.
I hope everyone who reads this article (and who can afford it) will join me.
--
No Agreement Was Done. (Score:3)
Since they can't win this, I hope the linux community keeps writing software for this device and DOES NOT ever go through the Digital Convergence servers. Let's show them what happens when letters like this get thrown around without thinking.
Good luck Digital Convergence.
Cease and Desist? why? (Score:5)
these have no driver requirements whatsoever
they work on every OS I've tested them on (NT, 9x, *nix/x86)
Why did this CueCat (yup, next is the CueDog right? or CueMouse?) require so much effort to just dump for free into the hands of the end user??? Call me crazy, but if I were going to hand something out for free, I wouldn't devote any time to serious development like a minor encryption scheme... I bet the next version of it is supposed to have an IP address per CueCat.
This kind of thing should be covered under Fair Use. Though I'll lay money (in the hands of EFF) that they'll continue blithely on their prosecution path and try to pull the DMCA down on the developer's head because it defeats a 'digital copy protection' scheme of some format.
If they're angry that they lost money on the development of the device, they have nobody to blame but their own developers and marketers. KIS - Keep It Simple.
If I get my hands on one of these things I do have a door that doesn't like to stay open, sounds like an adequate door stop. Will I get a Cease and Desist order too?
please
zerodvyd
Sue them first (Score:4)
1) Sue them seeking a declaratory judgement that you're not infringing on anything.
2) Once you win that, sue them in civil court for harassment.
legality (Score:3)
Alex
Re:HW eulas (Score:4)
However...this is hardware. A Physical device. It is not a copyrighted work. So wouldn't any such type of licence legally require them to go through some measure of proper contract procedure?
Do you have to sign anything to get one of these readers? If they don't make it CLEAR ahead of time, then its their own fault for being stupid.
Personally though, I have to agree, this idea of moving on to a future where corperations own everything and we just licence it, gives me extreme nausea.
I guess its their world, we are just living in it.
-Steve
People with limited imaginations are so funny. (Score:3)
In eactly the same fashion, Radioshack gives you a barcode scanner and they expect you to use it on their catalogues and their catalogues only. Nevermind that it could be used elsewhere. You should stop doing it now, and get ANOTHER barcode scanner for that. If cuecat was so unimaginative as to think that are as unimaginative as they are, trying to make a lame business out of these kind of artificial restrictions, they should find something else to do - really.
Tee Shirt ??? (Score:3)
Post office regulations apply to mailed ones. (Score:3)
(this got enacted after places started sending people unsolicited "merchandise", followed by a bill. Its very clear now, you mail it to someone without their asking for it, they own it)
I can't comment on the "loan" status for those that asked for one at ratshack.
Hehhe (Score:5)
I can see that conversation:
Law firm: So you want to sue flying butt monkeys?
DC: Yup.
Law firm: Riiiight...
But anyhow, this is just ridiculous, it's a physical product that sends output like a keyboard, basically, it is a keyboard. We can do anything we want to with it. We can destroy it, we can pee on it, we can set it on fire, we can strap gi joes and 74 bottle rockets to it and boldy send it where no cat-shaped bar code reader has gone before. We paid for it (granted it cost $0), it's ours.
The nerve of this company is absolutely absurd. Tonight, I'm going to write as many useless (maybe even useful) programs that use the scanner as I can just to piss them off.
Really, what is the world coming to (or at least the US)? I feel that there's going to have to be a revolution before too long, ya know? Kill all the stupid people!
Mike
"I would kill everyone in this room for a drop of sweet beer."
Clearly trying it on (Score:5)
One to be filed in the round file, methinks. A cease-and-desist letter worth paying attention to would have said exactly what IP was being infirnged (clue: none is) and used the words "cease", "desist" and "remove". This is just something threatening dire consequences in unspecific terms.
Charitably, one might assume that they are putting a marker down; they don't know whether they might have a problem with flying butt monkeys, but they do know that if they ever need to prosecute in future, they'd better not be found in proof that they knew about this software for a while, but did nothing about it.
Irritating, perhaps, but part of the price we have to pay for a common-law based system. The alternative would be for there to be government-provided coding licenses and prior restraints of what code you can write.
Re:Where's the code? (Score:3)
I haven't found that guys code but here is a page [plover.net] that is still alive.
Re:Being proactive... (Score:3)
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
McD's PR spin worked (Score:4)
As you can see at this page, entitled the actual facts of the mcdonalds coffee case [lectlaw.com], the coffee was quite overly hot. This is beyond the hot you expect coffee - it was served at between 180 and 190 F (most places serve it at about 140). This was enough to burn through her sweatpants and cause 3rd degree burns to 6% of her body, including some very tender spots. She required $20k in reconstructive plastic surgery. If the coffee was even at 155 F, she would have avoided serious injury. Initially, she asked McD's for just the money to cover the surgery, but when she refused and discovered over 700 claims from between 1980 and 1992, including cases of 3rd degree burns, she did the full-out lawsuit. Also, the jury found her 20% at fault, which is why she only got $160k of the $200k awarded to her. Since that time, the temperature of the coffee at that peticular McD's has been dropped to 158 F.
Just letting 'ya know the facts. =^)
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
What they are protecting (Score:5)
What "intellectual property"? (Score:5)
Reverse engineering of file formats are the closest example and my understanding is that courts have rules that this is fine.
I don't see how they have a leg to stand on. Hack on...
Cease and Desist (Score:4)
Sincerely,
Iaal T. Corporate, Esq.
Re:You missed the important part (Score:5)
When I walked into my local Radio Shack, the guy didn't even know what a CueCat was. I had to say, "You know, the barcode reader?" He acknowledged and handed me the thing. He took my name and address (I still can't figure out why I didn't use fake info). He never said anything about a license to use it. He also never said, on the phone or in person, that it was on loan from DigitalConvergence.com. He said they were "giving" it to me, for free.
After opening the package I plugged the thing into my machine, and glanced at the card they give you. I've just now read the entire card, and it says nothing about a license agreement, or even a mandatory look at crq.com. It only says to go to crq.com to get a unique activation code.
Unfortunately, in screw-you lawyer style, the back of the CD jacket says, in tiny print on the bottom, "Opening of this software constitutes acceptance of our License terms contained herein. Copies can also be found at www.digitalconvergence.com/ula.html. [...]" Although I don't recall a EULA in the package, it does direct you to online information. It also doesn't say installation constitutes acceptance, only opening the software. And that happened when you eagerly ripped open the plastic containing the device.
Therefore, unfortunately, we are all bound by those license terms. I could imagine, if one took it all the way to the Supreme Court, one could claim that decoding the CueCat output is merely reinterpretation of public information (since the CueCat dumps its code into any text editor you choose, they aren't making an effort to conceal the code).
If mine gets recalled, though, I won't give it back. The reason? I paid for it. That's right: when I was at Radio Shack, and before I could even see a hint of a license agreement in the package (the message was obstructed by the informational booklet), I gave away my name and address (it's even printed on the receipt they gave me), which is valuable marketing information. So Radio Shack (and potentially DigitalConvergence.com) can send me shit I don't want, and I have nothing to show for it? I don't think so. I deserve compensation for giving up my privacy.
Maybe that's why I didn't use fake info.
I do not belong in the spam.redirect.de domain.
Corporation annoyance recipe... (Score:5)
2. For additional fun, before step one, invert the bits of the source code. Claim this is a copyright protection device and nobody can attempt to circumvent it under the DMCA.
3. Use a barcode printer to print out the resulting sequence of numbers in barcode format.
4. Give to a friend.
5. Friend scans barcodes with free scanner and Linux driver.
6. Friend converts source code back into original form, saves it in a file whose name starts with Metallica and ends with
7. Publish the resulting file on Napster, Gnutella, Freenet, etc...
8. Lather, Rinse, Repeat.
.sig: Not all