**************************************************************************** >C O M P U T E R U N D E R G R O U N D< >D I G E S T< *** Volume 2, Issue #2.18 (December 28, 1990) ** **************************************************************************** MODERATORS: Jim Thomas / Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2@NIU.bitnet) ARCHIVISTS: Bob Krause / Alex Smith PERIPATETIC GADFLY: Brendan Kehoe USENET readers can currently receive CuD as alt.society.cu-digest. COMPUTER UNDERGROUND DIGEST is an open forum dedicated to sharing information among computerists and to the presentation and debate of diverse views. CuD material may be reprinted as long as the source is cited. Some authors, however, do copyright their material, and those authors should be contacted for reprint permission. It is assumed that non-personal mail to the moderators may be reprinted unless otherwise specified. Readers are encouraged to submit reasoned articles relating to the Computer Underground. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ DISCLAIMER: The views represented herein do not necessarily represent the views of the moderators. Contributors assume all responsibility for assuring that articles submitted do not violate copyright protections. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ------------------------------ From: Dark Adept (Ripco-312-528-5020) Subject: Trade Secrets; When are they Bad? Date: Sat, 1 Dec 90 1:38:06 CST ******************************************************************** *** CuD #2.18: File 5 of 5: Trade Secrets: When are they Bad? *** ******************************************************************** Trade Secrets: When are they bad? by The Dark Adept A trade secret is a method or procedure or information used by a company to obtain profit. The law protects trade secrets through copyrighting and patenting and various other laws. The main reason a company protects this type of information is to stop competitors from producing the same product thereby taking away from its profits. The main reason the government protects the rights of the company to protect this information is to promote innovation and progress (at least according to the U.S. Constitution). But, there are times when copyrighting and patenting reduce profits and restrict progress and innovation. The User Interface ================== One of the most important aspects of a computer program is the user interface (the way in which the user is allowed to interact with the computer). Ideally, a program should be able to perform complex tasks and remain user-friendly. However, the user interface does not affect the way in which the program completes its task. Two different programs with the same user interface can perform the same task in two different ways. One might be better or faster at the task than the other. Conversely, two programs that perform different tasks may have the same user interface. The point is that the user interface is generic. It can be applied to many different programs without changing the value of the program. It merely enhances or detracts from the program. In the same way, the user interface of any product does not change the integral operation of the product. Take the automobile, for example. In all automobiles the user interface is the same. There is a wheel you turn for direction. There are pedals on the floor to control speed, etc. The quality of the automobiles are not judged for value by the user interface, but by how the automobile responds to input from the user. How fast it goes, how durable it is, etc., these are the qualities by how an automobile is selected for purchase, and not by the fact that it has a steering wheel. One may take this analogy further by comparing automatic transmissions against stick-shifts. Neither changes the performance of the car in a radical way. A purchaser selects automatic or manual as a matter of either aesthetic preference or familiarity. If the buyer prefers stick over automatic, but the car with the stick is way behind the automatic in terms of performance, he would generally choose the automatic since he is buying the car to perform a task. The way the car performs the task is more important than how he tells the car to perform the task as long as both are equally intelligible to the car. Can you see the point I am trying to make? A program can work either through a command line interface, a key-stroke interface, or a GUI (Graphic User Interface). None of these change the performance of the program to any great extent. They merely change the aesthetics and the ease of use. The interface should not be allowed to be protected under law. To do so would interfere with innovation and progress without conclusively affecting the profits of a company. If company A holds the rights to the best interface, but their program is worthless, then company B will still make more profit. If it is truly the best interface possible, then progress would be slowed since people would have to learn many different types of interfaces to go from one program to another. Clearly, it would be in the interest of all concerned to leave the interface open for public usage and only protect the code behind the interface. Algorithms ========== To protect an algorithm is to, in effect, copyright a mathematical equation. Since all algorithms reduce down to a mathematical model, that model would not be able to be implemented except by whoever holds the rights. This would greatly reduce the productivity of mathematicians. Imagine if someone patented Integral Calculus. Don't laugh. IC is an algorithm like any other. It is a solution to a problem. Or what if someone patented the internal combustion engine? Most of us would be walking. But like the engine, it is not the algorithm of the engine that is important, but how it is implemented. All engines work on the same basic principle, but they do so differently. This is why one engine works better than the other. This is why a buyer would choose one engine over another. Source Code =========== While source code should generally be protected, there are times when it may be more profitable to a company to release either the source code or important information pertaining to it. A prime example is IBM and Apple. Apple chose to keep their operating system under close wraps. IBM, in their usual wisdom, chose to let some of it fly. This caused the market to be flooded with "clone" PC's. Given a choice, most people bought PC's or PC-compatibles. This generated more third-party support and even higher sales. What is the best selling computer today? You got it. Who practically sets the standard for every computer that comes out today? Good guess. While some may say that IBM could have made more money if they had not released the information, I grant you that. But, IBM has something that Apple does not: insured existance. There is no way that IBM could be jettisoned from the marketplace. IBM has insured that they will exist long after Apple closes its doors. All they have to do is keep putting out downward compatible products and people will continue to buy PC's. The Hacker Ethic Vs. The Business Ethic ======================================= Hackers (including programmers) view computer programs different than businessmen do. Bits and pieces of programs are meant to be shared in order to further innovation and increase productivity. Programmers have always shared algorithms, traded libraries, and swapped subroutines. They do this so that they do not have to "reinvent the wheel" every time they write a program. If something is very basic and can be used over and over in many programs, then programmers share it with others. Businessmen, on the other hand, are not motivated by sharing but by making a dollar. There is nothing wrong with this at all. The problem is that sometimes making a dollar in the short run can be detrimental to the overall market in the long run. Being misers with algorithms will force everyone to spend a lot of time and MONEY to develop new products. If something is so basic and so useful, then it should be allowed the freedom to be developed to its fullest. Only then will the real bucks come rolling in. The solution to this paradox is that hackers have to learn that companies need money to keep going, and businessmen have to learn that computers cannot be treated like most products. A compromise needs to be reached so that both profits and innovation are protected without destroying each. Not everything should be given away, and not everything should be kept secret. Both should collaborate on deciding what to release and what to keep. Lately, it has been more of a business decision than a programmer's, and the imbalance is not good. Conclusion ========== There are more things to consider when protecting something in a computer program than next quarter's profits. In the long run, it may be more profitable to let the competition use some of your ideas. The more people who are able to easily access computers, the bigger the market, and the more profit. If only one company has a good interface and the price is high, the market will be small. Obviously, not everything should be allowed to be used freely, but the decision-making process should include more than looking at the bottom line. A fond farewell..... ==================== This is the last in my series of articles for CuD. I have tried to show another side of the Underground than the one that is commonplace. There is much more to the Underground than hacking and phreaking. It is composed of many intelligent people who can make a valuable contribution to the computer industry. They should not be thrown to the wayside as they have been. While I am not a spokesman for anyone down here, and I am certainly long-winded and less intelligent than many, I sincerely hope that these articles have made an impact on someone somewhere. I would also hope that I have inspired other members of the Underground to show that they are more than people who break into systems. This is your chance: start showing people what you really are, and then they will take you seriously. You can do a better job than I did; I know you can! Go out there and do it!!! I would especially like to thank CuD and Jim Thomas for allowing me to espouse my drivel in their fine digest. A finer and fairer publication could not be found anywhere. I would also like to thank Dr. Ripco since it was his BBS that first connected me to Underground when I was a mere pup of 15, 6 years ago. I have yet to see a BBS that compares in quality in all my years down here. As for my future plans, I will be taking a sabbatical from being active in the Underground for a while. I have many things to reflect over and much to plan for my life. I have a few projects that may or may not include programming, writing, and editing a tech journal that will contain articles from members of the Underground of a technical nature. This journal would be sent throughout the computer industry as a means of communication. I know these articles probably sucked, but I gave it my best shot. In the words of the Darkest Adept the world has ever known: Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law; Love is the Law, Love under Will. Thanks for the memories.... As always, I remain... The Dark Adept Email: Ripco BBS (312)-528-5020 ******************************************************************** ------------------------------ **END OF CuD #2.18**  Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253 12yrs+