Command Post is licensed, not sold. Those using Command Post to aid in the development of applications which will not be sold or licensed for a fee are not required to pay a licensing fee for Command Post; this is referred to as the Amateur License. All other usages of Command Post are subject to a licensing fee of $15.00USD per copy installed on a handheld or emulator; this is referred to as the professional license. Those purchasing the professional license are entitled to receive a copy of the Command Post source code. The Command Post source code may not be redistributed, sold, or released under any other license. Purchasers of the professional license will also receive priority support via Email.
(continued)

You do realize that there is very little software which is actually "sold"? This is not extremely different than most licenses, except that some buyers will have access to the source code.

I much prefer the linked method.

What? They make you pay for it? What else would you use it for EXCEPT in the aid of developing applications? I'm a little confused...

That was just quoting from the readme file. You only pay if you want the source code of the app.

Oohh... I see. That makes a little more sense now... but couldn't someone just disassemble it? I wouldn't because 1) I don't know how and 2) it's probably illegal if they're asking money for the source.

Detached Solutions has probably already thought of the possibility of disassemblers. I bet that the application would show up invalid to a disassembler because it is probably encripted or has an encripted header.

That's clever.

Umm... no. If it was encrypted, there'd be the whole problem of the program not running.

By "encrypted", I meant that the header would be unrecognizable in some way to disassemblers, but native to the calculator. The header is probably written slightly differently in apps that are not meant to be disected, so that the disassembler does not recognize it. The calculator will recognize it because it essentially does the same thing as a regular header, and it may be written in the calculator's native HEX dialect, or have an underlying code written into the source that prevents disassemblers from successfully disassembling.

read the license closer getting the source code is not the only requirement. If Command Post is used in conjunction with commercial products, then purchasing the professional license is required.

-Greg

How often to people make programs to sell? I haven't seen too many.

First of all, I highly doubt you actually went to the trouble of copyrighting your work. I'm guessing that you just put the copyright thing in there like so many other people just to tell us not to copy it. Therefore, you most likely have no legal means to stop us from distributing the source.

My comments:
1. Don't try to get us to buy software you haven't legally copyrighted. Not only that - if you expect to be paid, don't release uncopyrighted software.

2. Your source code *will* be distributed, whether or not you ask us not to.

3. If you really want to, I think it costs something like $70 to copyright intellectual property.

4. This is the first time I've ever heard of someone asking for payment for the source to a program they wrote. Sounds Bill Gates-ish... he was, after all, the first person to complain that somebody had 'stolen' his software.

Be assured that I'm not saying your program is worth buying. I think it is, definitely. I'm just saying that I think you should be more cautious in your efforts to protect your work.

you know MV is in detached? "Conflict of Interest on ticalc.org" will hit the headlines in the days to come.

well, the goal wasn't to make a huge sum of money. I would have to sell at least 100 copies to break even (I would count myself lucky to sell 10 copies). I want everyone to be able to use Command Post (CP). I recognize that someone who uses CP to develop non-free apps will have an income, and the CP license is such that those individuals can easily make that money back by selling a few copies of their software.

I could have asked TI to sign CP so that everyone would be required to pay…

besides, I have a history of doing strange things... remember when KerNO was first released? People ridiculed it. Now, they seem to at least get along with it if not even use it... I’ll never know what works and what doesn’t if I don’t try it :)

-Greg

ack. That was a bit confusing.

Be assured that I'm not saying your program ISN'T worth buying. I think it is, definitely. I'm just saying that I think you should be more cautious in your efforts to protect your work

That's what I meant to say. Sorry, it was almost 2AM when I wrote that.

thanks for clearing that up... honestly, i took your comments a bit too personally (or at least more so than you probabbly intended.)

-Greg

in terms of protecting my work, I wanted to make sure that everyone would at least have a chance of using it. In trying to accomplish that, I had to leave some of the 'security' measures normally involved in preventing piracy behind...
It's a compromise to be sure, and I hope that the users of Command Post will respect that. Doesn't mean that they will show respect... but i can't control their actions and/or attitudes...

-Greg

http://www.copyright.gov/ faq.html
http://www.copyright.gov/ circs/circ1.html

a quote: "When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form so that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device"

It is my hope that the members of the TI-community are upstanding citizens, and not thieves. On the flip side, if anyone who purchases the Professional License distributes the source code, i am quite sure that having their address and other contact information available to myself could potentially be put to use...

The inclusion of the source code is meant as a bonus - a reason to buy the Professional License nothing more. Its a way that i can say thank you to whomever wishes to support the Command Post project, and any eventual continuation of it. I know allot of people are into having the source code of programs so that they can make their own modifications to meet the needs at hand. case in point, the free s/w movement (although you should be quick note that my license is quite a bit different from theirs...)

now, if only i had money for a laywer... lordnitro boomer, you just may have just found yourself a job...

-Greg

Technically, your work has no legal copyright unless you have registered it with the government. I know this because I've copyrighted a few songs I've written.

http://www.copyright.gov/faq.html#q13

by which of course I mean that you have to have an actual copyright certificate to prove that you've copyrighted it. As soon as you make it you're *eligible* for protection, yes, but not actually protected. You're protected from having someone else *copyright* your work, not from someone else *copying* it. Of course, you'd have to somehow prove that you're the original creator of your work (which I have no doubt).

... lordnitro boomer? *fear*

I think I'll buy a license. Just because I care.

You are protected, you just can't bring suit without registering with the government. If there is someone you wish to bring a suit on you can register and then bring the suit to court.

But then, for the most part, I don't care about people copying my work. All my software is released under the GNU General Public License (see link). If I was into music I'd use the Open Content License (http://opencontent.org/opl.shtml).

>>Don't try to get us to buy software..

Greg isn't trying to get 'us' to do a dang thing. He is nice enough to release free-ware to people who are writing free-ware. However Ti has thrown capitalism into the "ti-community" (in quotes for a reason) with thier flash apps.

This has been a debate before on various message boards about resources, code, and assistance made/given by people for free-ware going to the assistance of paid for apps.

Furthermore whining about the technicalities of whether Comand Post actually is copywritten is not going to get you far.

As far as source code goes I have a policy about only open source programs on my calc. I might make an exception: but The tict handle explorer and kerno satisfy most of my on calc hacking/crash protection desires.


-Samuel

ps: I like the history handle exploring options Greg :)

Note that I wasn't whining. I'm trying to help Greg protect his assets here (pun intended).

Thank you for spreading such distasteful FUD.

>I highly doubt you actually went to the trouble of copyrighting your work

The "trouble of copyrighting one's work" consists in *creating* that work, plain and simple.

>I'm guessing that you just put the copyright thing in there like so many other people just to tell us not to copy it.

Which is 100% in his rights to do.

>Therefore, you most likely have no legal means to stop us from distributing the source.

Even if this is true, it doesn't make distributing it less illegal.

>if you expect to be paid, don't release uncopyrighted software.

There is no such thing as "uncopyrighted software", except for public domain, which has to be declared by the author as such.

>I think it costs something like $70 to copyright intellectual property.

You got you figure wrong by $70.

In the future, please inform yourself before spreading false information about laws - expecially if you're giving them with such arrogance.

Thank you.

Don't get into a fight about it... if he copyrighted it and all, it's okay. You can still get the "Amateur Liscense" for free. That's all most people would need anyway.

>The "trouble of copyrighting one's work" consists in *creating* that work, plain and simple.

No. You have no protection to keep people from copying your work simply be *creating* it. You have to pay for a government license for that protection. The protection you get is that nobody can *copyRIGHT* your work. Try going to the National Copyright Office's web site and reading their FAQ. Your questions will be answered.

>>I'm guessing that you just put the copyright thing in there like so many other people just to tell us not to copy it.
>Which is 100% in his rights to do.

Sure, but it doesn't protect him from much. His property can still be copied freely UNTIL HE PAYS FOR THE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING.

>There is no such thing as "uncopyrighted software", except for public domain, which has to be declared by the author as such.

Any software for which the author has not registered a copyright is UNCOPYRIGHTED. You can claim the copyright, but that doesn't mean it's copyrighted - it means you CAN copyright it, and nobody else legally can.

>In the future, please inform yourself before spreading false information about laws - expecially if you're giving them with such arrogance.

Oh, I'm sorry, I guess maybe I should copyright something first before writing about copyright laws. Wait, I ALREADY HAVE. Come on. This wasn't an attack on Greg. If you interpret it that way, then that's your problem.

>>I think it costs something like $70 to copyright intellectual property.
>You got you figure wrong by $70.

Obviously *you* haven't done your homework here, either.

Basic Registrations (Fee to accompany an application and deposit for registration of a claim to copyright): $30

Renewal Registrations (For works published or registered before January 1, 1978): $60

There are quite a few other fees. The one I paid was exactly $70.

Ohhhh, he got shot down...

please refer to http://www.copyright.gov/ faq.html
I think that you will find much better information than was has been posted on these message boards.

-Greg

ONCE AND FOR ALL, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF
you would read the US Gov. Copyright FAQ!

http://www.copyright.gov/faq.html#q13
Quote: "
Do I have to register with your office to be protected?

No. In general, registration is voluntary. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. You will have to register, however, if you wish to bring a lawsuit for infringement of a U.S. work. See Circular 1, section Copyright Registration.
"

Being that I have ample proof that I am the author (and i think TI, DS, Ticalc.org, and quite a few other individuals as well would back me up on this fact) I feel no need to register it with the copyright office. If I am forced to bring suit against someone, THEN I will register, and take whatever legal action is deemed necessary.

i rest my case.

-Greg

Considering "copyright" is something most countries, if not all, have an agreement on (if my work is copyright 2003 LjL in Italy, it is in the US), what you must do in the US in order to actually enter the courtroom and scream that your work's been stolen has little to do with the actual idea of *copyright*.
If lord_nightrose really meant to give you friendly advice, then well I'm sorry to have over-reacted, but his posting didn't sound *too* friendly to me, so there you go with the reason for the flaming.
And I still have to correct you, lord. Your work *is* copyrighted from the moment you create it, no matter what the US department of my uncle says or does not say. That fact that a jury will or will not laugh at you when you try to bring a lawsuit has nothing to do with the concept of copyrighting.
In order to have reasonable protection for my music creations in Italy, I have to register with the SIAE. That's needed becuase if someone steals my work and *they* register it at the SIAE, judges will believe the SIAE by default when they claim their copyright date.
There are well-known poor-man's workarounds, like sending a priority letter to yourself containing a copy of your work; that way, the date printed on it by the post office is official and can serve in a court to demonstrate I created the work first.
Still, in the post office print vs the word of SIAE, the latter wins, quite certainly.
... but that DOESN'T mean my work isn't copyrighted; it's just that the fellow who registered with SIAE has better proof than I have to convince as judge.

Um, this probably isn't the best place to ask, but what is FUD? Just curious...

Fear, uncertanty and doubt. I hate FUD.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up :)