Is it piracy to remove know-how protection ?

[SAMIOS1]

Ss

Ushidayo is speeking wise.. PLC must be unlocked ..as i never lock my programs and i heve build allot...what is the point locking a project ? to make life difficult to those who are looking after the PLC in every factory or job so that they MUST contact the "masters" who bulid those (and locked projects) and if they cannot find them ? then what rebuild the project again or tell the manager ..that "can do nothing" and so ...

 

[Ken M]

Ok, let's throw another log on the fire ...

How often have you seen a line-stop and immediately some guys get their programming software out and start hacking around in the PLC looking for the 'cause' of the problem? And then when they find the bit that's not on (and they've all seen it on before so they know it should be) they slip in an extra network just to turn it on under a certain unique set of conditions. And then 29 shifts later (or some other prime number) somebody else spots another unexpected little issue and slips in some extra code just to deal with that. And then 53 shifts after that ...
And of course the real problem is a sticky limit switch, but everyone's convinced the PLC code is wrong and keeps 'fixing' it. And finally, 1237 shifts later (don't worry, I checked it!) someone eventually replaces the limit switch which now means all these software 'fixes' are at best redundant code or, at worst, antagonistic. If only the original code had been protected and people just didn't get in to the habit of changing the code to make it match what they wanted to see.

I'm a great believer that code doesn't rot, corrode, go off or get worn. If the system was properly tested, commissioned and signed off, and I know that's a big 'if', then I would only start altering code as a very last resort. And if you can prevent idle or accidental tinkering, then so much the better.

Regards

Ken

 

[DesertDog]

With the new Digital Rights Management Laws in the US even removing copy protection software from your computer is illegal. This means when you play your Sony CD and install the enhanced media, after it installs it's copy protection software with it, it's illegal to remove it even though it is buggy and will allow any hacker to hide files on your machine by simply naming them starting with $sys$ If you wonder if this has happened put a text file on your desktop and rename it $sys$canary.txt and see if it disappears.

 

[Steve Bailey]

The person with the attitude that he can 'fix' code that's been working properly for the past six months by adding a patch instead of finding the real problem is the same person that's most likely to hack his way past the protection.

 

[DesertDog]

I've seen places where the staff has been a tremendous help taking care of many issues on their own. I have also seen where the staff is their own worst enemy causing more problems than they solve. I find the best thing is to have a good relationship with them so they are comfortable talking with you before making any rash moves. Often you can talk them through simple troubleshooting moves before unnecessary drastic changes are made.

 

[ushidayo]

Ken,

You use very big "if"s in your argument! I think testing is about finding faults in a system rather than proving the system works. When the frequency with which faults are found drops below a certain level, the testing phase can stop. This level at which to stop testing varies a great deal between companies and projects. It also has a major influence on cost and delivery times. With the increased use of PLCs, the complexity of control systems has rocketed over the past 15 years. There are so many combinations of process, machine and fault conditions that the PLC must handle. I find quite often a software problem might not appear until perhaps six months after commissioning, sometimes it can be a year. When these delayed problems occur, it can be very difficult to get the supplier to come to site quickly.

This might not be such a problem if the software was well documented, especially the functionality of the knowledge protected parts. But, in my experience, software documentation always leaves a lot to be desired.

Finally, I think my own software is adequate and everybody else's software, that I have seen, requires improvement. I have never wanted to copy another programmer's software (and I've seen plenty). Now isn't that an invitation to get flamed?!

 

[SAMIOS1]

Ss

Well Ken i think you misunsterstand some thinks ...we do not search the code to find the "bug" or that the code is brocken somewhere we are in busines many years ..looking the code you find in very little time the broblem, but imagine some machines with 20 limit switches and 15 prox and 10 foto and 2 encoder and...... so what do you do start searching every foto every limit and.... well that is not the correct way ,i have seen Siemens PLC (115 CPU) to fall in stop position why ... and lets say you take a look at ISTACK and see "FB12 fail......" so what do you do ....or maybe you havent seen yet such problems so i beleive having the code and working on the code it is professional ....sorry for my english..

 

[10baseT]

With the greatest respect to those who don't have faith in their own work , I wouldn't dream of protecting a block that wasn't 100% , and maybe some people can't write 100% code , but I take some pride in the fact that at the very least , all blocks that I use are 150% tried and tested for all conditions . The block header is full and complete , with revisions and method statement.

I would much rather not have to protect any of it , but while there are thieves out there ( and that is what they are ) , who don't think twice about stealing another mans work , then so be it . One lesson I learned very early on while on the tools , was whatever happened , you never ever steal or "permanently borrow" another mans tools . The software I write is my stock in trade , but this year , one or two naughty boys have copied it , this doesn't happen any more .

I have to completely agree with Ken regarding software - there is always an amateur muppet who is ready to dive in with laptop open to solve the problem when the line stops , solving being an "always_on" slung around the offending interlock . I have had just such a situation a couple of weeks back , with a local "software expert" stating that a motor started of its own volition after the isolator was switched back on - what he didn't mention was the fact that some clown had messed about with field wiring and swapped over two isolator feedbacks . The guy had been on "every siemens training course and was the site expert" - this is precisely the guy who should be given locked up software , as they are unable to fault find , only to find fault .

When software is fairly much your bread and butter , and doing it well is your repuation , then it doesn't go down well to watch people making money out of stealing it .

I notice that some people describe programmers as prima-donna's , well so be it , it is nice to be really good at something , rather than just be a tryer , don't knock someone elses ability or skill unless of course you are very much better ...... you wouldn't dream if telling Madonna she couldn't sing , and I'm sure that she would tend to get the hump if you bootlegged her CD's - why should a programmer have to be different?

Perhaps there should be a poll " would you steal another programmers software and pass it off as your own work ? " - it would be interesting to see just how many would .

 

[Amr Hassan]

i would ask one question ? why should someone remove the protection from the blocks ? i think the answer is that the probably u want to use this funtion but u need to make some adoptation to make it suitable for yr project

and if the writer allows u to use his code in the first time , that would not be a problem to remove the protection

 

[keithb]

Hi

Regarding stealing someone elses code, I would never assume my code is better than anyone elses. I've been in the business 20 years and I'm still learning. I've seen many examples of both poor code and good code. If I see an example of good code, I might think "Well, I never thought of doing it that way. Maybe I should do that next time" Is that stealing? or is it learning by example? I'm talking snippits of code here and improving programming technique.
I think we should always be willing to learn from others. After all, isn't that what we do on this forun every day? Never assume that YOUR way is always the best way.

Having said that, using someone elses complete code for your project without their permission, that's stealing.

 

[kamenges]

Origibnally posted by 10baseT:

...... you wouldn't dream if telling Madonna she couldn't sing...

Bad analogy. Madonna can't sing. It's the pop image and the excitement of her videos and concerts (basically her charisma and 'look') that make her famous.

As for software protection, as it applies here, it only really works well to guard against the quick fix. Because the protection schemes are relatively easy to break they don't protect against code thieves.

Because of a change in job I've taken a complete 180 on this subject. I used to work for a company that sold relatively standard products to people who by and large only wanted it to work. They didn't care why it worked. The company I used to work for had a full-blown field service department with people scattered all over the world. Because of the number of product provided, field service was much easier if you could limit the possible failures. In this case, modifications to the software have the likely effect of changing the machine response and put a field service guy right into brainlock. The base software changed very little from customer to customer. In this case I was a firm believer in protection.

The company I work for now makes one-off equipment. The machines are designed and built from the ground up every time. We have no dedicated field service department. Field service comes directly from the engineering pool. In this case there isn't as much inherent advantage to have the machine operate in a specific way. As long as the way it operates is predictable and meets customer requirements pretty much anything goes. Also, being a one-off, there is the possibility the software will contain errors that the customer will find before we do. In fact, if there is an error, the customer will find it before us as we will never run that software again. Also, our customer base is much more technically self-sufficient than the customers from my previous company. Given these reasons I think that software protection is a bad idea. Let the customer help themselves if they can. If they make matters worse in the process that is the risk they must be willing to assume.

As you can see the answer to this question, as most others, is very perspective sensitive.

Keith

 

[DesertDog]

i would ask one question ? why should someone remove the protection from the blocks ? i think the answer is that the probably u want to use this funtion but u need to make some adoptation to make it suitable for yr project

and if the writer allows u to use his code in the first time , that would not be a problem to remove the protection

I have pulled apart some of the TI conversion blocks in order to leard how to accomplish certain things. The use of pointers with Step-7 I find difficult and this let me see working examples far better than the books I've seen. Just an example of why to open a working block.

 

[digitalfist]

If you work for a company to repair machines (like a maintance electrician)and you write some code to repair\upgrade the machine...who has the rights to the code?

 

[monkeyhead]

How many of you copyright your PLC code?

I can only think of maybe one or two of our machines that came with a conditional license about the PLC code listed in manuals or the contract. We do have a lot of custom machinery, but we've also got some stock machines that don't say a damn thing about copyrights or licensing.

From my perspective, I'll work with the writer of the code unless they want to charge me to fix something I can on my own, or are uncooperative about helping us further customize the machine for our operation.

On our last big machinery purchase I made sure that we had access to all the code involved... If it were up to me, we wouldn't buy anything that we weren't allowed to view the code on. Troubleshooting is also so much easier when you can follow a procedure through it's rungs to figure out what's supposed to be happening when. A paper copy is alright, but a pain in the *** to flip through.

 

[darrenj]

Surely the point here is not whether we can do better or believe we need access to the code. The point is that someone, the author, has placed a very clear 'keep out' sign on the code and do we have the right to ignore that?

Let's say I lock my car. Do I have the right to do that? Well I'd say yes. And is it reasonable to expect people to respect that? Well, again, I'd say yes. And if someone wants a closer look around in my car, is it reasonable for them to break in (no damage done, just looking around). Well, here I'd say no. Regardless of what they do in my car I don't want them there. Now I know you're all going to blow holes in this analogy. What if I've parked across the exit from a fire station? Well, fine. Take my car. Remove it. Put it to one side. But I still don't want you in it.

If you're so damn sure the problem is in a protected block, from someone else, write one of your own to fix the problem. No copyright issues, problems solved, end of matter.

Now I'm not arguing for or against protecting blocks. I'm just asking do we have the right to bust in to something someone else has locked?

regards

Ken

Did you sell the "car"....if you did the the "car" and everything in are the property of the owner..

Now we are talking about software and thats a different story..

I asked here quite a while ago about "copyrighting" my code..I got shot down .....i was told if didn't like it then tuff..

Here is the story..

There was a machine that needed upgrading..It had a PIC controller (G&L..Gidding's and lewis..i am sure people like peter have heard of them!!) in it.. (Amazing piece of machinery in my point of view considering the times..) anyway..this controller was outdated and not supported anymore..the plant was told if they had a plc issue it would be about 6-8 weeks for the card to be sent out and repaired...so it was upgrade time..

I put a proposal in as well as the original manufacture..I was about half the cost..and they had the original program..(i had to start from scratch)..

My local Plant went my me..the other plant went with the manufacture..I chose a control logix platform for my installation..keep in mind i had NEVER programmed a control logix before..I Because of this and the fact that i was going to completely rewire the machine (approx 150 digital I/O and about 12- or so Analog) i told them it would take 3 weeks of down time.. The manufacture told them 2 weeks.. well i was done in less than 2 weeks and they took over 3..(I love it because they still have problems with the manufacture!!)

About 3 weeks ago the manufacture Tech was down to look at the mechanical side of the machine and the tech said.."Yours is much more user freindly..Ours is cumbersome..We should hook up and copy the program...He was only sort of joking..It took me 8 weeks of watching the machine,reading the books and talking to the mechanics to create the program..should i leave the program unprotected?? does it make a difference if i do or dont..

The plant would obviously have the code..no problems there..they wouldn't give it away..

It is a sticky question..But in my mind moot..If someone wants the code..they are going to get it..

In summary i think this..If you are the maintenance people and are having problems..hack in to it..(you would need to..just call me and i will give you the codes)make it work for you..no harm..no foul..If you copy to make gain..Thats bad..and in that statement i also include if you copy and make minor changes then sell as your own..thats bad....

anyway..whatever!!

D



Merry Christmas