All I am saying is that, if I buy a car, for instance, it will be well understood that claiming access or codes to the ECU pre-programmed software will be out of the question, although (without being itemized) I paid for every single bit. Try and request a feature upgrade or a bug fixing...
Re-programmed? Or chip-tuned?
Either way, I am sure Audi did not help you do it, instruct on how to do it or will fix the thing under warranty or anyway else but replacing the ECU wih a new one, pre-prorgammed with whatever it was meant to be initially.
I leave my code in there but password protected - not sure how secure this is but hey it may stop the "trunk slammer"
Colin,
We had a rogue programmer on staff who did not like using one of the 10 or so company passwords. I had to use a password cracker on more than one of his compiled workspaces. In essence, the file I extracted from the master was like a passworded zip file. The tools did the trick in a fairly short amount of time. For a variety of reasons, he was let go...
I don't think I would characterize protecting source code as a 'dirty little secret'. The US is a caveat emptor society, as much as I don't like it. It is up to the customer to protect themselves and become knowledgeable about what they are purchasing, and do due diligence to make sure you are dealing with an ethical company. There really is no way sure fire way to do that of course, but that's the structure we live under.
I just phoned my dentist to get a mold of my teeth they made sent to me because that office is too expensive and I wanted to use a less expensive office. Turns out they disposed of my cast that I paid for so now I have to pay for it all over again with the new office. I considered it my property since I paid for it, but apparently the dental office can legally dispose of it without my permission or knowledge. Is that a dirty little secret too?
Paul
We do work for various government entities: state, local, and federal, colleges, universities, etc. We're asked to provide the code quite frequently. It's typically part of the contract.
I am not trained on AMX programming, but I could have had the chance to learn if the files were not password-protected at my last job. I was working for the military and a company was brought in specifically to do the install years before I got there.
The contracting officer/site installation supervisor who was there for the install weren't smart enough to negotiate the handling of the source codes/layout files, so I was stuck with an AMX control system that needed to be updated 3-4 years after install, but no way to do so.
What's the big deal, you say? Doesn't the installer have to right to residual income from updating the site programming? Well, considering that the site was in the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, bringing the installer back to add 2 more PCs to the video matrix and allowing them to be switched onto the video wall..Not quite cost effective.
As it was, the installer/programmer basically left the customer high and dry, knowing that they were most likely not going to be called back in if the customer needed small changes to the system. They left no contact numbers on the PC that was used to push the layouts and other configs out. I got there, and there was not even a map of the control system.
There are VERY good reasons for customers to request the source code for their control systems. Not all integrators take care of their customers, and these systems are so expensive, that customers cannot afford leave themselves open to being taken advantage of by the integrator.
One outcome of 'Who does the code belong to?' is the lack of highly developed and modular code. Modular code is by definition code that could be used over and over again without modification. Who paid for the original development of the module? And does the employment of the module in other codes mean other clients own the source code to the module. AMX implies that module code does not belong to users of the code. (no access to source code for AMX modules)
We programmers like to make our programs modifiable by using well named variables. If we want to change an input for a device, it should be as simple to change one variable instead of sifting through the whole program for '1*2!'. But how does the client know if the programming was done in such a way that it takes 1 hour to modify instead of 10 hours. What's the point of having source code if it is written poorly?
My point is the issue of who's code is it causes programming to remain in an infantile stage. Why make a program modifiable if there is no guarantee that there is more work from a client? Just make the projector turn on, lower the screen and switch the switcher just like the client asked and their expectations are met.
We can't use the Microsoft model because their business plan is marketing to the masses. I'm sure the development on Windows7 is in the billions. Yet it will only cost us around $99 for pre-orders. We are custom programmers. Every program is a beta program and we cannot charge $99 for code,
I believe we should not release source code for Modules and only provide a document on how to integrate the module.(it's functionality should be apparent in the master source code programing) The Master code should contain integrated functionality that is unique to their system and the source should be provided for this. This would allow for programmers to be free to innovate and replicate without loss of intellectual property. If the client wants all the source code then it should be written from scratch and all development time should be accounted for and reimbursed.
So what is wrong with the simple solution of wording the contract to state the the customer is purchasing a software license? This doesn't mean that you have to sell it for $99. Since we are not selling millions of copies of the software like Microsoft, the cost of a single license is greatly increased. Any work done on software for a specific job is improvement to the base software, not affecting the terms of the license agreement with the customer.
So what is wrong with the simple solution of wording the contract to state the the customer is purchasing a software license? This doesn't mean that you have to sell it for $99. Since we are not selling millions of copies of the software like Microsoft, the cost of a single license is greatly increased. Any work done on software for a specific job is improvement to the base software, not affecting the terms of the license agreement with the customer.
I tried presenting this to a number of owners but they seemed to be consumed with the short term profits. AV projects are normally pursued with a start and end mentality. Selling a license means to them that they are not charging out the true cost to the customer. It's hard for them to account monies that are made in other projects are because of losses in other projects to create the original code.
Comments
I re-programmed the ECU on my Audi - just saying
Either way, I am sure Audi did not help you do it, instruct on how to do it or will fix the thing under warranty or anyway else but replacing the ECU wih a new one, pre-prorgammed with whatever it was meant to be initially.
Colin,
We had a rogue programmer on staff who did not like using one of the 10 or so company passwords. I had to use a password cracker on more than one of his compiled workspaces. In essence, the file I extracted from the master was like a passworded zip file. The tools did the trick in a fairly short amount of time. For a variety of reasons, he was let go...
http://www.cepro.com/article/who_owns_the_code_ce_industrys_dirty_little_secret/#When:14:09:00Z
--John
I don't think I would characterize protecting source code as a 'dirty little secret'. The US is a caveat emptor society, as much as I don't like it. It is up to the customer to protect themselves and become knowledgeable about what they are purchasing, and do due diligence to make sure you are dealing with an ethical company. There really is no way sure fire way to do that of course, but that's the structure we live under.
I just phoned my dentist to get a mold of my teeth they made sent to me because that office is too expensive and I wanted to use a less expensive office. Turns out they disposed of my cast that I paid for so now I have to pay for it all over again with the new office. I considered it my property since I paid for it, but apparently the dental office can legally dispose of it without my permission or knowledge. Is that a dirty little secret too?
Paul
You mean you own a license to use WinXP under the conditions specified within the license.
Paul
I am not trained on AMX programming, but I could have had the chance to learn if the files were not password-protected at my last job. I was working for the military and a company was brought in specifically to do the install years before I got there.
The contracting officer/site installation supervisor who was there for the install weren't smart enough to negotiate the handling of the source codes/layout files, so I was stuck with an AMX control system that needed to be updated 3-4 years after install, but no way to do so.
What's the big deal, you say? Doesn't the installer have to right to residual income from updating the site programming? Well, considering that the site was in the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, bringing the installer back to add 2 more PCs to the video matrix and allowing them to be switched onto the video wall..Not quite cost effective.
As it was, the installer/programmer basically left the customer high and dry, knowing that they were most likely not going to be called back in if the customer needed small changes to the system. They left no contact numbers on the PC that was used to push the layouts and other configs out. I got there, and there was not even a map of the control system.
There are VERY good reasons for customers to request the source code for their control systems. Not all integrators take care of their customers, and these systems are so expensive, that customers cannot afford leave themselves open to being taken advantage of by the integrator.
Russ
We programmers like to make our programs modifiable by using well named variables. If we want to change an input for a device, it should be as simple to change one variable instead of sifting through the whole program for '1*2!'. But how does the client know if the programming was done in such a way that it takes 1 hour to modify instead of 10 hours. What's the point of having source code if it is written poorly?
My point is the issue of who's code is it causes programming to remain in an infantile stage. Why make a program modifiable if there is no guarantee that there is more work from a client? Just make the projector turn on, lower the screen and switch the switcher just like the client asked and their expectations are met.
We can't use the Microsoft model because their business plan is marketing to the masses. I'm sure the development on Windows7 is in the billions. Yet it will only cost us around $99 for pre-orders. We are custom programmers. Every program is a beta program and we cannot charge $99 for code,
I believe we should not release source code for Modules and only provide a document on how to integrate the module.(it's functionality should be apparent in the master source code programing) The Master code should contain integrated functionality that is unique to their system and the source should be provided for this. This would allow for programmers to be free to innovate and replicate without loss of intellectual property. If the client wants all the source code then it should be written from scratch and all development time should be accounted for and reimbursed.
I tried presenting this to a number of owners but they seemed to be consumed with the short term profits. AV projects are normally pursued with a start and end mentality. Selling a license means to them that they are not charging out the true cost to the customer. It's hard for them to account monies that are made in other projects are because of losses in other projects to create the original code.