Playboy
Williams, 1999
Revenge From Mars
Bally, 1999
Star Wars Episode I
Williams, 1999
Wizard Blocks
Williams, 1999You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider joe_blasi.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.
The DMCA has exemptions for stuff that should cover useing any software / hardware to make your payed for code / hardware work.
Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete. A dongle shall be considered obsolete if it is no longer manufactured or if a replacement or repair is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace. (A renewed exemption from 2006, based on a similar exemption approved in 2003.)
Quoted from goatdan:I'm not positive that this is what it is, I have not talked with anyone directly involved, and there is no way for me to tell for sure, however with some of what I do know, my *guess* is sometimes when you sign up to release something with a license, part of that license may be to ensure that your product is not used to help distribute the licensor's IP improperly.
The fact that some idiot decided to take it upon himself to hack the release, claim it was all his own, and then release it may very well have made the license to continue to product NuCore contingent on the people behind NuCore shutting down the illegal copies of the product before any more could be made.
Again, before anyone quotes me and says, "YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT", this is a *guess* based merely on speculation. If I was told something directly, I don't comment - however, from other related things that I have done, this is something that is done.Depends on how you look at it. Before these were out there, computers for the machines cost easily $1000+. You also get the computer from your system to sell it afterward, so if you bought NuCore for say $800 as a total package, you could easily turn around and sell your computer from your machine for $500.
It also did a lot of other stuff for your machine. Amongst them was a simple but fun Breakout style game, a JukeBox mode that I honestly would LOVE at my place, a slight speed boost so the graphics would be rendered better, the ability to easily upgrade to an LCD monitor or if you keep your original one, easier controls to monkey around with the image, and a tournament system so you could actually compete with others online.
For me, I am positive I would have kept my original computer, and I was extremely seriously close to pulling the trigger on the system when I was unemployed and buying nothing pinball just because of how cool it was.
All of this IP BS is a joke and over old software that people own but just some kind of VM system to run the software as it can't run on newer hardware. (people do this with other non pinball stuff)
Any ways what is stop some one from posting how to use free / open source tools to run it (if not for the custom pci card) that it would be easier to put it in a VM. Maybe if you where able to by pass the card at boot and do PCI Passthrough to the VM then it may work with no need to get rom files.
Quoted from sd_tom:Well its not stolen if its made open source as well. Which maybe is why pinbox felt OK about repackaging it again as it was infected with LGPL license terms (which is why in my experience with commercial software we avoid GPL entirely and only use LGPL if we use them as is / no modifications). GPL licenses basically say, if you use this product in your product your product must also be open source (publish code). LGPL says (last I checked) you can use the library and not release your code that uses it but you do have to publish any mods to the libraries.
what pieces are cobbled together for nucore I have no idea but you do have to pay attention. Wondering if the pinbox guy, faced with a lawsuit, is turning to the open source community / EFF for help. Hence someone showing up here.
It would be very interesting if Nucore's lawsuit ends up backfiring in a huge way.
Maybe but due to bad laws like the DMCA maybe even the open source QEMU can be in in legal trouble.
also how much open source code / ripped from pinmame / mame is in pinball arcade?? at least they don't try to shut down VPM.
Quoted from asay:Huh? What does DMCA have to do with a legitimate open source project?
with DMCA abuse like this
http://www.copyhype.com/2014/03/some-examples-of-dmca-abuse/
https://www.eff.org/document/unintended-consequences-fifteen-years-under-dmca
anything can happen not likely to happen with most open source projects.
But out side of pinball VM systems can be used to get about software that licence locked to hardware by faking mac address, getting round software that is licensed by socket. Tell the system I have 1 socket with a very high number of cores (more then what 1 of the real cpus has) So I pay less then buying a 2 socket one. Yes that can be a DMCA violation.
This forum is not really the best place to talk about DMCA stuff. Other sites have big posts about the DMCA.
Quoted from goatdan:Yeah, I'm not a lawyer, but the defense here seems to be:
"They weren't making money on it, so no copyright exists!
Well the rights owns to WMS pinball are makeing money off of that? why this should be free and the rights owns should have no say about what you use to get your HARDWARE working.
Quoted from goatdan:But that's the thing. Depending on how you interpret the GNU license, you don't need to release everything. For instance, this:
"If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works."
Unless I'm wrong, and I've worked under these sorts of agreements in the past, the QEMU release would have been it's own thing, and NuCore would be considered an independent and separate work. Again, how I interpret this, the GNU agreement is speaking of the core code. I don't have a NuCore set, but from what I can tell, the thing that they should have been doing (and for all I know, may have been doing) is state that the work was done on the QEMU platform and provide a copy of the source code for the version they used. Because the running of a pinball machine is pretty far outside of the scope of what QEMU was built for, you could reasonably state that this was done as an independent work in itself for the sections that were added to it.
Now, again, I'm no lawyer and I'm lucky in that I have worked with the person that created the GNU open source part of the projects I have done, but from what I understand this is a totally reasonable answer to the whole thing.
Regardless, deciding that you're a vigilante isn't really a very good legal argument.You can fix your HARDWARE without NuCore, so this is a moot point. If this was the way that Williams released it, and then they refused to give it out, sell it, or anything else and when systems broke, it just needed this software to boot, then I think I'd feel differently, as Williams would be legally stopping you from repairing your machine. But they aren't. Your HARDWARE can be repaired without NuCore completely legally.
but they can shutdown / sue a free VM system that does let you run the code?
I don't think it pretty far outside of the scope of what QEMU was built for as it's just an PC (with an old chipset) + custom pci card the driver board still needs to be there with parallel pass through.
There are other people that may find use with an VM that can also emulate custom cards / work with old apps / os's that are tied to old chip sets.
Now if NuCore took the QEMU code and added the custom pci card to it's code then what can they do use
Mess / Mame code base? same legal issues? to slow?
Dos box code base? same legal issues?
VirtualBox code base? same legal issues?
make there own X86 VM / emu???
Now can Nucore come out the code changes to QEMU or will the WMS rights owners have a fit about that?
Quoted from Whysnow:I don't understand all the legality but on the surface it sure does appear that nucore guys had stolen and used the open source code for their own profit. That is pretty messed up that they are then trying to sue someone else for release the code they were supposed to have originally kept open source.
Equally messed up is that I purchased a nucore for a premium at one point and the Nucore guys would not provide ANY support for the product. When contacted at one point I was actually told the product is no longer being sold or supported and then no further reply.
Also talking about profit why should WMS right owns profit off of that as well??
Why should they care that some has a VM to replace the old Pin2k cpu?
If there is going to be a lawsuit they need to go after who own the rights to the games as well as they made profit off of this as well with discovery on what they know about the nucore code.
As for suing someone else for release the code they were supposed to have originally kept open source now with the game rights owner pushed for then THAT IS VERY MESSED UP.
This seems like a big mess and for some who read about DMCA abuse and other tech issues (on more IT / tech based web sites) this may even have some big chilling effects.
Quoted from KingPinGames:i have (2) two Nucore systems installed in my games. i recently had the ssd drive in one of them go bad. it was so easy to fix.
1 ) install the new drive in the working system
2 ) get to the linux prompt
3 ) clone the drive
You where lucky to be able to save the data from the old SSD. I have head of SSD going bad that take the data with them.
Quoted from goatdan:No, but that isn't what we're talking about here. NuCore wasn't just a VM system letting you run the code. It was a complete replacement and upgrade to the hardware that was in the machine. You also had to convert the ROMs (copyright: Williams) into a new format which would be beyond the scope of most end users.
The problem was they can shutdown a free VM system that totally ripped off the work of another system that was made and included ROMs which they were the copyright holders on.
If someone wants to go out and release a brand new NuCore-type system that is open source and does not include the ROMs, and it is NOT BASED ON NUCORE (or other work that was used without permission), there is no problem with that.
Included ROMs?? well if you have a pin2k game then you have the rom and right under the DMCA to use a system to bypass it (Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete.)
Quoted from markmon:I didnt say that they should support windows. I said that the reason for not supporting it shouldnt be the task scheduler. And I was quite clear on why.
Fair enough. But I would blame this more on the emulation software available on Windows then (ms virtual pc and vmware player).
Actually I understand the problem just fine, which is why I explained that I don't believe the issue is in the task scheduler. PCs are fast enough now a days with enough cores that we can rely on microsecond level granularity with no issues with other services running. Otherwise lots of software would be broken.
Talking to a parallel port from a VM in windows is an issue also an USB to parallel port adds more mess.
As for emulation if you are not talking to outside hardware on an USB / parallel / ect bus then in the emulator you have more control.
Quoted from jwilson:There's a giant parallel port right there on the Pi - it's the GIO pins.
I think some parallel stuff needs a real port and not some kind USB to Parallel one. Also that needs to map to the emu.
the pinball 2000 code / os is tied to an old X86 chipset.
Also the they can't just take some open source ARM to X86 code add your own code to cover the custom pci cards and add your own DRM to that.
Quoted from Zitt:You realize that in the court of public opinion - each party has their own "spin" on things. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
Use of QEMU is perfectly legal ... as it's open source. The question is if NuCore needs to provide the source code of their derivate product to make it legal.
As a software developer myself; I've used GPLed software in my software. The key is you have to clearly divide the two products and offer the source for the GPLed portion.
Is there more then one case? I think there is the GPL case and they DMCA take down.
and if they do give out the source code they can't trun around and sue some from makeing there own build even one that takes out the dongle based DRM.
Off hand I can think of at least one other case that was kind of like this take open source code add some stuff to it + some kind of DRM / key system with out giving the code and then trying the DMCA take down route on someone who put up just about / the same thing with a DRM bypass / keygen.
Now what will the rights owns think about being forced to post the source code / be forced to have no DRM / dongles?
also there can be some unintended consequences depending on how things go in court with bad laws like the DMCA.
QEMU is perfectly legal but it and other VM / emulators can be used to bypass / cheat / reuse some software licenses. one EG Some vendors license their application per processor / but in VM you tell the VM system the I have 1 Socket with say 32 cores.
Now in this case this more of a VM for a old embedded PC system that has software tied to custom cards / old chipsets. Now the code used hear can be useful for other cases like this. But why does the right owner needed to give ok this / get a cut / force DRM for something that still needs the some of the old hardware as all that is being replaced is the PC?
What if some codes an VM that lets you redirected PCI card to a VM in a new system and just VM all the old chipset an other hardware to make it run why should they be able to step in use the DMCA to shut that down?
Quoted from MustangPaul:You forgot "expensive". I just bought the game a few weeks ago even though I knew all this was going on. So if Nucore wins and my computer goes down I'll have a large and "expensive" paperweight. In other words Nucore doesn't give a shit about us owners.
If Nucore wins it may set some bad chilling effects for GPL / LGPL software. As well as other VM systems.
Also the idea that an rights owner can force some who makes a vm / emulator system to run code / hardware that a end user owns and is useing to replace old failed hardware to add DRM to is bad as well.
What if some who now owns the rights to a old dos game / app says you must our own build of dosbox loaded with DRM and sues some who removes that DRM? And they take a cut of the cost even from people who own the software (why should they have to rebuy the software that they own?)
What some makes a VM that does PCI passthrough and just makes the card thing is running on the old X86 pc hardware? will Nucore have to sue them as well leading to an other court case?
Quoted from MustangPaul:Same here, it's just that I don't want my game to turn into an expensive paperweight.
and I don't a case like this to set a bad precedent.
Quoted from Zitt:Lowepg, That is harsh. Stealing anyone's work should come with penalties.
Having said that... Stealing LGPL code, modifying, and not releasing the derivative work is equally horrible and should come with penalties.
My fear is that there are two sides with equally justifiable positions... and they'll settle out of court under NDA and we'll only hear the Nucore side.
My opinion is IF Nucore *IS* using a modified QEMU binary... they should be REQUIRED by the courts to release the source code per License like Oracle had to.
Well even if there is an out of court settlement with an NDA that may not stop the people behind the LGPL / GPL code from having there own lawsuit / just adding some new code to the main code base that does some of the same stuff.
Quoted from thedefog:I keep source code for some of my own projects with my host in pw protected ftp directories for projects I work or have worked on with friends that I don't regularly meet up with. What is so odd about that? If any hacking via brute force or another method is proven, there is a problem here.
You're talking about decompiling an executable and reverse engineering it or taking the stuff off the install ISO? Plausible, as it is running within emulation anyway, if you really knew what you were doing. So you would have to be able to extract the necessary processes you needed to bypass the DRM from that. I honestly don't know enough about P2K or NuCore to know that exact process, but that is not an easy task for anyone. I'd like to meet that person if that is what happened. Hacking sys11 roms and writing new code & rules for games is tricky enough business. Pulling off something like this from an executable alone would be like that times 1000.
not a coder but if say it's just QEMU + MediaGX chipset + the PCI card + DRM then it may be easier to do the decompiling an executable and reverse engineering at least the DRM part.
Quoted from megadeth2600:I'm not looking to distribute anything illegally
. Obviously, if my solution were available, it would be without ROM images since I have no desire to get sued
I can't find any data sheets on that CX5220 PCI to ISA bridge device. It looks like it consists of a custom interface to the MediaGX's video bus, an AC97 audio circuit (unused by Pin2K), power management features, an MPEG1 accelerator (do either games use this ... Star Wars has video clips), and maybe some other crap
Why oh why did they use this thing
Now the boards used are just standard pc boards and the bios is standard as well. The software on the card only works with CX5220 other XC52XX chipsets do not fully work.
The pci card has it's own boot rom and loads before you see bios screens (like some video cards) and also boots the system (Like a scsi card)
This was before bios had stuff like addon rom display mode (This BIOS feature controls the display of ROM messages from the BIOS of add-on devices like the graphics card or the SATA controller during the boot sequence.)
New boards with UEFI have setting to load Legacy ROM or not.
Now maybe with a new system trun off loading Legacy ROMs / UEFI boot mode and load a VM like qemu with chipset drivers for XC52XX or what ever the software needs to load up and do PCI pass through.
Quoted from flecom:the pci card does a bios interrupt on power up, the bios never actually posts/boots... the card talks to the hardware directly... the pci card seems to be the master, not the motherboard
it's actually kind of neat in a terrible "why on earth would anyone do this this way" kind of way
really? I think I read somewhere that changing bios settings can effect stuff. Also the card may just be over ridding the bios screens but not the full bios.
Quoted from jwilson:When commenting on "what were they thinking," you have to remember that they were developing a *completely new operating system from scratch* at the same time they were designing RFM. There was no real-time embedded Linux then, and I guess they couldn't afford QNX, so they were on their own. Plus, they were coming from an embedded background which tends to inform your decisions.
So, for the sake of time, they cut a few corners, like making it board-specific. The plan was to make it multi-board compatible later.
In less than a year, they managed to make a new game on a new platform, with video assets, *and* make the new platform - and Stern can't even get finished game code out in that time.
So, maybe cut them some slack!
And if they would been some time later then may not needed the pci card at all. When did IDE-Compact Flash really start to see use use in embedded pc based systems? Other embedded systems just had HDD's + ISA or PCI driver cards. Pinball was not a good idea to have an HDD in it. Things are better now Days.
Also on board sound kind of sucked (nforce2 sound was good) 2002? and ISA sound cards can make the system slow down next to pci ones. But they may been able to get away with some kind ac97 / OSS / ALSA system with out needing a sound DSP just need more CPU power. OR just have a pci sound card.
Quoted from thedefog:This seems to be the correct answer. Regardless, nothing they did with it seems to fall in the illegal category. I checked out the license fully, everything seems legit. At this point, I am in the boat of this lawsuit probably has more to do with Williams license than the alleged hack. If this is the case, The Williams license will never hold up. No hardware emulation has that I know of has ever lost in court. Firmware is wishy-washy though, technically, all digital storage can be considered firmware though.
But all takes is for some bad courts cases to make things hard on people running legal emulation?
What about the IT people who have get rid of there VM and start running the os's bare metal as the VM where shut down due to some DMCA case that forces there hand.
A bit of a rant but read some cases of dmca abuse
Quoted from Sonny_Jim:QEMU has a built in SAMBA server:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/QEMU#QEMU.27s_built-in_SMB_server
The thing that concerns me the most is that it seems that they have tried to censor any mention of QEMU in the error messages a user might see, for example:
"use thePB2KEMU_TMPDIR environment variable to set another directory where the PB2KEMU"[sic]
I'm pretty sure that should read:
"use the QEMU_TMPDIR environment variable to set another directory where the QEMU"
That is bad and that gives them the right to sue some / use DMCA take downs on some who takes this code that they did not licenses properly and removes the DRM?
Even if 2.0 if full rewrite with no outside code they still don't have the right to bully someone trying to fill the license gap of the old code.
Quoted from flecom:stolen isn't the correct word true, but definitely some GPL issues in there, but IANAL
the whole thing really bothers me, because any case that involves emulation going to court is really dangerous for everyone... you could unknowingly set very bad precedents and ruin the party for everyone as it were... could you imagine if pinball people lead to the death of MAME somehow? *shudder*
and it can be more then that MAME is small next to the death of emulation / VM's that are used in data centers and at client sites.
Do you want to be the one to tell your clients? the bosses? the CEO?. That due to a court case we can no longer host that app / OS / ETC you have that only runs in older ver of windows server / others and you must pay the cost of upgrading to version that does (if there is one) + the cost of hardware (or the cost of running old hardware that works with the old os) to run the all the VM's that we have on there own boxes?
I don't a case to set a bad precedents that can give rights to the software IP owners (even old software they don't make or sell any more) + ones that own part of the IP due to them picking it as part of the bigger sale of rights. The say over running software that the end user owns of putting in a VM system.
As for why you need the ok of the owner of a patent that software uses to run the software in a VM is not good as well. The last thing needed to give more power to IP owners of Software patents.
Quoted from goldiewag:So what's the abridged version of all this Nucore stuff?
Nucore is suing Pinbox for code stealing, but Nucore may have also infringed on QEMU's copyrighted software?
Nucore seems to have taken the QEMU code changed some stuff (names of print outs / names of variables) to hide that fact.
at the core they took the QEMU code added stuff to cover the PCI card (that at the basic level is storage + sound card) they also added code to get the right screen mode / chip stuff needed to make the pinball os run / boot up right that is very tied to the low end chip sets that WMS used. They also added usb dongle lock down to it.
Now pinbox came and found a way to bypass the usb dongle.
Now this case is bad for all 4? sides.
1. WMS / the IP rights owners of the Pin2k system and games. Why should they get to take there cut again / push the need for DRM in this like the driver boards / table parts don't count as there own? Why should they get to control the system that people are useing to get there owned systems working?
2. QEMU / mame / others with open source software. Why should people be able to take there software / code. Also there may a small Chance that due to chilling effects with the DMCA BS that qemu and other free software has to shut down or they have to become more limited.
What if QEMU add code that does some of the same stuff that Nucore does (may be not the pci card part but the chipset stuff) there are other embed software / hardware driven by old pc's with custom cards / code that does not work on newer x86 pc hardware. Also should Nucore / WMS IP even be able to sue QEMU if they add the Citrix chip set (owned by AMD now?)
3. Nucore for taking free software then suing someone for taking there code. also why did nucore shut down when there drm was bypassed? Who does that now days or even in the past?
3A What will this case due to pinball arcade if they say one day want to DMCA take down pinmame / visual pinball? how much pinmame / mame code is in there system? There emu system seems to do some thing that pinmame did first.
4. pinbox takeing the code and passing removing the DRM if not for Nucore taking the QEMU code they would of just been like any other group / coders that bypass DRM systems. But why did nucore shut down then they came out?
There may be some patent stuff that may come as well.
Quoted from asay:Software wise, NuCore is comprised of 3 parts:
1. The PIN2K ROM software for RFM or SWE1
yes but the owner of pinball 2k games still have them have rights to use them.
Quoted from asay:2. An open source program called QEMU, which emulates an environment that allows the PIN2K ROMs to be run on modern hardware.
QEMU is an Virtualization / Emulator system.
Quoted from asay:3. NuCore's proprietary software to interface that QEMU emulation with their hardware and the hardware on the pinball machine.
Enter Pinbox. A guy modified that 3 part NuCore package to run on standard PC hardware, so that even if NuCore was never sold again, people wouldn't be SOL if their Pin2k died.
NuCore's added code to QEMU for the cpu chipset stuff and the custom pci card also they used them build in code in QEMU to pass the parallel port to the VM. Did they rip the roms and make them into an HDD image and use the MAME? DSC2 code for the sound?
Quoted from asay:This upset Nucore, so they are suing Pinbox.
Pinbox's main defense in the lawsuit is that NuCore was distributed illegally to begin with by violating the license of QEMU. People representing QEMU have echoed the same concern (somewhere in this thread in fact).
This is my understanding of the entire situation, if anyone knows any different they are welcome to correct me.
The QEMU people may be more about stuff free software abuse / dmca abuse. Stoping an MS from trying to shutdown / dmca an VM system just as it can run there code in it.
Quoted from goatdan:To be fair, the Pinbox guy claimed to have created it all himself, which would have been fine, but then it was very quickly discovered that he took the straight up NuCore code and did a slight modification to it.
The ramifications of that are huge - if Pinbox guy had, as he claimed, created his own operating system, then even if NuCore was never sold again, people wouldn't be SOL. If he did, there would and could be no lawsuit. What Pinbox guy did was not ethical in any way, regardless of any other facts in this story.
own operating system?? QEMU and this software are running on Linux.
The Pinbox guy found a way to bypass the Nucore DRM and maybe if not for him the QEMU lawsuit will have gone no where but they or the WMS rights owner had to sue. Maybe Nucore should of been free / open source but you pay for support / pay for the rom dumps / pay for pre build systems that run it. It's not like you can use NUCORE with visual pinball. Or they should of given back all of the mods to QEMU.
Quoted from asay:So we agree? I feel like you just repeated everything I said, just much harder to read lol
Yes just trying to get some of the technology terms right.
Quoted from goldiewag:If Nucore loses the lawsuit what do you think that means for the future of Nucore, Pinbox, or for any legit option for keeping pin2k alive?
They can maybe sell the rom dumps / roms in format that it can use But the nucore code (with source) has to be put out in the open. So that people who get there own dumps don't have to pay to use them with the rest of the pin2k system that they own.
What about the court cases? And the very iffy case of trying to shutdown the free replacement. The licensing terms may say they have to sue the free one but if that free is just QEMU + PC chipset stuff needed to get the os to boot + DCS2 (likely from mame).
Maybe on DCS2 but then also need to sue mame.
The pci card boot rom + game roms maybe but the people using this own the games / have the right Under the DMCA exemptions to replace / workaround the failed hardware.
Now for there licensed one did they really make there own X86 emu? or will they being giving out the pc level chipset work / what ever they did to the pci card or the rom disk driver out to QEMU?
Also with there code for the chipset you may even be able to PCI pass though with the real card on a new system (if you get one that still has pci slots) Giving them even less of a case to fight people doing that and no the licensing terms can make them try to calm the other way as WMS does not and never has owned the rights to X86 or pc chipsets.
You're currently viewing posts by Pinsider joe_blasi.
Click here to go back to viewing the entire thread.
Wanna join the discussion? Please sign in to reply to this topic.
Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run without any 3rd-party banners or ads, thanks to the support from our visitors? Please consider a donation to Pinside and get anext to your username to show for it! Or better yet, subscribe to Pinside+!
This page was printed from https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/nucore?tu=joe_blasi and we tried optimising it for printing. Some page elements may have been deliberately hidden.
Scan the QR code on the left to jump to the URL this document was printed from.
Des Plaines, IL