Open source or reverse-engineering projects for Ultimate 1 MB, Incognito, Sophia, etc.?

[trannus_aran]

Are there any? Don't get me wrong, it's incredible we have these boards and upgrades, but unless I'm missing something, it looks like the actual circuits, Gerber files and such, are all proprietary? That's not a problem in itself, but open source options would be a huge help towards preservation

[bfollowell]

57 minutes ago, trannus_aran said:

Are there any? Don't get me wrong, it's incredible we have these boards and upgrades, but unless I'm missing something, it looks like the actual circuits, Gerber files and such, are all proprietary? That's not a problem in itself, but open source options would be a huge help towards preservation

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the hard working, intelligent individuals that developed and created these devices still own the rights to them and, as such, I'm not sure of the legality of reverse engineering these devices. Also, if these individuals wish to leave their devices proprietary and closed, your desires to have them otherwise are irrelevant.

 

Most of them are members here and fairly regular visitors, so maybe they can comment to your concerns.

 

[Rybags]

There actually are a few projects where the required engineering and software info is available but they are in the minority - I can't recall which ones.

Given the production cost, you'd barely save any money vs buying from an established seller where they are able to get bulk component and production discounts.

[_The Doctor__]

     Reverse engineering is generally legal. In trade secret law, similar to independent developing, reverse engineering is considered an allowed method to discover a trade secret.

     Reverse engineering is not illegal, reverse engineering is not unlawful. If it was, innovation probably would be stifled to a significant degree. Anyone can buy a product off the shelf and freely study it. That's why smart design often incorporates strategies to conceal sensitive technology.

     Reverse engineering generally doesn't violate trade secret law because it is a fair and independent means of learning information, not a misappropriation. Once the information is discovered in a fair and honest way, it also can be reported without violating trade secret law.

     Does Reverse Engineering Comply with the Law?

Reverse engineering has traditionally been a legal method of acquiring trade secrets under certain conditions. The product must be acquired through “fair and honest means.” Trade secrets cannot be protected through these basic purchasing means. An example of this is buying a product on the open market. The Restatement of Unfair Competition states that “The owner of a trade secret does not have an exclusive right to possession or use of the secret information." (Protection is available only against a 'wrongful acquisition, use, or disclosure of the trade secret.' What defines a wrongful acquisition, use, or disclosure? This occurs when an agreement is breached such as a non disclosure agreement or when a trade secret is obtained through “improper means” such as trespassing, fraudulent means, and deception.)

 

Just because it's legal doesn't make it the right thing to do though.

Edited April 8, 2023 by _The Doctor__

[flashjazzcat]

No. Don't even think about it.

[TGB1718]

@_The Doctor__ nice description, but what about the software side of it. It may be possible to reverse engineer

the hardware, but would it be illegal to then flash the original software to make it work (I feel it would be illegal, certainly wrong)

 

I don't condone this for the upgrades we have, I'm willing to pay for all the original gizmo's we have

and appreciate all the hard work "our" developers put in to make our beloved Atari's the beasts they are today.

[invisible kid]

Could they be fixed to run Bounty Bob Strikes Back? Yes, the software would need to be reverse engineered or recreated from scratch as well. Not useful to me, don't care for any of these items, but other folks seem to like them. Just had a thought, would fpga be a good place to start with?

Edited April 8, 2023 by invisible kid

[flashjazzcat]

15 minutes ago, invisible kid said:

Could they be fixed to run Bounty Bob Strikes Back?

The CAR version of Bounty Bob Strikes Back seems to work perfectly well when launched from the SIDE3 loader on an U1MB machine. Specifically what issue are you referring to?

17 minutes ago, invisible kid said:

Yes, the software would need to be reverse engineered or recreated from scratch as well. Not useful to me, don't care for any of these items, but other folks seem to like them. Just had a thought, would fpga be a good place to start with?

We've already experienced the unlicensed cloning of U1MB and other Candle-designed devices, and that certainly did not end well. The 'other folks' who 'seem to like' these devices can purchase the originals, since they stocked in perpetuity. They are also preserved for posterity via emulation.

[+MrFish]

10 hours ago, trannus_aran said:

preservation

They're well preserved by the individuals involved in their creation, production, and continued development. Go away...

 

[trannus_aran]

I mean even if we had some assurance that current or previous versions would be open sourced by the developers if/once they aren't able to produce them anymore in the future, that would be a big step up (again, from an already fantastic set of kit!).

 

I just see how this is from the perspective of, say, the fujinet and MiSTer projects and wish we had something equivalent.

[+Stephen]

Well, I really want a Ferrari F40, but I can't afford one, they are rare and hard to come by.  I am therefore, going to find one and steal it.  That way, I can preserve it for future generations.

 

How about this - if you want to preserve a technology for the future, maybe buy one of them.  Even if you don't use it, store it if you care about preservation.  It may not help move along the idea of single SIO loading speeds being the only way forward, but you also won't be stealing IP.

[_The Doctor__]

Nope you can't or shan't steal it, but you can take a legally purchased one reverse engineer it and make some pretty cool kit cars from it!

Edited April 9, 2023 by _The Doctor__

[Alfred]

There's no need to reverse anything while the authors are still around and active. If KMK falls headfirst into an old well, then I suppose we might have to revisit the issue.

[flashjazzcat]

KMk?

[+Larry]

Well, there is a case in point -- Bob Puff's hard drive crash that took out all the info and data on a lot of his products.  Most of his stuff was downright cool -- and most of it likely will never see the light of day again.  But like Y2K, we all survived and prospered with the new technology that has been developed since the 80's/90's.  I've got to applaud folks like Wes Newell that voluntarily put their old stuff as PD or Freeware.  But current stuff -- not so necessary, and if it is still saleable, then it's hard to rationalize why anyone would do it.

[+Allan]

@trannus_aran  Well, if somebody wants to reverse engineer Atari hardware, why not spend the time doing it for older, rare hardware like the:

 

1. Bit 3 Full View 80-column card

2. Austin Franklin 80 card

3. Black Box, by Computer Software Services

4. Supra Hard Disk Interface, by Supra, 

5. Microstuffer printer buffer

 

There are probably more things you could add to the list. Feel free to.

 

On another note, it is sad to see a lot of wasted energy on this board sometimes. I am grateful to those who choose to spend their 'free' time developing Atari software and hardware, as well as doing things like archiving, helping other with their knowledge, etc., etc.

 

[_The Doctor__]

Austin Franklin Color 80 card is the one to have a go at.        A number of people have multiple BIT 3 cards.

Supra, Black Box, Floppy Board are nice, and next in line IMHO.

Printer buffer? Well most print buffers like quadram etc work fine with the 850 or after the P verters of the day so a print buffer device isn't as pressing.

That's my thoughts about that list.

[+kheller2]

22 hours ago, trannus_aran said:

I mean even if we had some assurance that current or previous versions would be open sourced by the developers if/once they aren't able to produce them anymore in the future, that would be a big step up (again, from an already fantastic set of kit!).

 

I just see how this is from the perspective of, say, the fujinet and MiSTer projects and wish we had something equivalent.

I’m struggling to grasp what worthwhile purpose this serves in reality.  A developer can say they will open source it all they want but they can at the last minute not do so, or sadly if something happens to them before they get to do so.  “Hey I may open source this in 20 years, but for now please pay me for my work.”

 

There seems to be some concern in your words that bad things will happen if the world doesn’t “open source”. 

[+mytek]

Enjoy it while you can in the present. No one can control the future or what it brings.

[+Allan]

6 hours ago, _The Doctor__ said:

Printer buffer? Well most print buffers like quadram etc work fine with the 850 or after the P verters of the day so a print buffer device isn't as pressing.

That's my thoughts about that list.

We would just like to get these working: 

 

[trannus_aran]

I don't know where anyone got the idea I want to steal/don't want to buy these projects, and in fact I have! I'm happily installing an incognito into my 800 as we speak And as for the "challenges" given to me to reverse engineer these projects after getting them myself, I just might 😜 I have 800XL here that needs a memory upgrade, haha. Might leave that one aside as a test bed for projects

[Alfred]

14 hours ago, flashjazzcat said:

KMk?

Konrad dba Drac030

[bfollowell]

2 hours ago, trannus_aran said:

I don't know where anyone got the idea I want to steal/don't want to buy these projects, and in fact I have! I'm happily installing an incognito into my 800 as we speak And as for the "challenges" given to me to reverse engineer these projects after getting them myself, I just might 😜 I have 800XL here that needs a memory upgrade, haha. Might leave that one aside as a test bed for projects

 

I don't know. All I can speak to is myself, but I found something very off-putting about your post asking about preserving items that are still actively produced, sold, and supported. It just seems like a very strange request that might possibly have less than positive ulterior motives in mind. I worried that I may have really misread your post but looking at the other responses I can see that I am far from the only one to get the same impression, mistaken or not.

 

At the end of the day, I agree with the others, who cares if the item is open source or "preserved" if it is being actively produced and supported?

 

By all means, feel free to reverse engineer one of the devices that you've purchased, but don't try to get a team together to assist you. The last thing in the world we need is someone doing something to tick off the few modern developers that we have still developing and producing new items for our 8-bits.

 

[ChildOfCv]

On 4/8/2023 at 2:41 AM, TGB1718 said:

@_The Doctor__ nice description, but what about the software side of it. It may be possible to reverse engineer

the hardware, but would it be illegal to then flash the original software to make it work (I feel it would be illegal, certainly wrong)

In the US at least, code is copyrighted.  That's why the original PC clones were not always fully compatible with the PC.  They had to write a brand new BIOS that performed the operations according to the original IBM spec.  IIRC, a couple early clones emerged that were sold with a copy of the original IBM BIOS, and they were immediately sued into oblivion.  Creating new source code based on the reverse-engineered data, though, is legal.

Apparently GameBoy's DRM method is to embed the Nintendo logo into the ROM.  So in order to produce a ROM that GB will play, you must include Nintendo's trademark in the ROM.  So the only way to write homebrew for GB without getting sued was to hack the GB itself.

[trannus_aran]

5 hours ago, bfollowell said:

 

I don't know. All I can speak to is myself, but I found something very off-putting about your post asking about preserving items that are still actively produced, sold, and supported. It just seems like a very strange request that might possibly have less than positive ulterior motives in mind. I worried that I may have really misread your post but looking at the other responses I can see that I am far from the only one to get the same impression, mistaken or not.

 

At the end of the day, I agree with the others, who cares if the item is open source or "preserved" if it is being actively produced and supported?

 

By all means, feel free to reverse engineer one of the devices that you've purchased, but don't try to get a team together to assist you. The last thing in the world we need is someone doing something to tick off the few modern developers that we have still developing and producing new items for our 8-bits.

 

I mean truly the end of it as far as motives are concerned is: I like these 8-bits quite a lot, and from where I'm standing there are two kinds of technologies: open source and carried into perpetuity, and proprietary ones we are all lucky to have with us for the time that the providers are willing and able to produce them. That's where the inherent anxiety lies, not with any ill-will towards the folks who make these incredible contributions to the scene.

Edited April 10, 2023 by trannus_aran