A message from Pure Digital Technologies

Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Posts: 2

We at Pure Digital Technologies have to let you all know that this recent behavior has unfortunately passed the line separating cool/fun from completely illegal. Our code and algorithms are proprietary and protected by copyrights worldwide. We think you know that (1) it has been more than 15 years since a copyright notice has been required in the US, and much longer outside the US and (2) copyright protection has nothing to do with security or ease of access.

Yes, one of our folks may have accidentally left the virtual window less than fully secure. But, most of you wouldn't think it was okay to climb through an unlocked window of our office and steal our things (and if you would, well, get ready for some jail time). The reality is... the same thing applies here, no matter how stupid you think we've been. Our ftp files are our property and downloading them (as well as posting them and screwing around with them) is a clear violation of our copyrights, not to mention a variety of other federal and state civil and criminal laws.

In addition to copyrights, it is totally clear from your postings on this site that everyone was well aware that any lapse on our part was an unintentional mistake and that all the downloaded material is proprietary and confidential. It is not okay to misappropriate our confidential info (and it doesn't take much skill to steal versus really hack).

You all know very well that we are not litigation crazy (in fact, just the opposite). We welcome this group and your efforts; so long as they remain legal efforts.

Accordingly, we want you to know that it is not our desire to haul anyone into court (yes, we have the IP addresses from our logs). However, the extent of the damage (and our appropriate response) will likely depend on how fast all this information (and anything any of you have derived from it) is removed from this and any other sites as well as deleted from all your machines and storage media.

This really needs to happen TODAY; hopefully that will avoid the worst of the potential damage and can be the end of it.

BTW we sell an awesome reusable video camcorder that offers 2-3 times the quality, a zoom lens, and 30 minutes of storage. Here is a link to a $20 rebate and a list of stores and sites for purchase. ItÂ¹s a much better deal (although, less fun) than illegally stealing files (or using stolen files,
also illegal) to hack our camcorders/cameras.

http://www.puredigitalinc.com/products/index.html

Keep up the good (legal) work. Our next generation single-use products (with new security) are now beginning to hit the market.

Again, this purging really needs to happen TODAY.

Pure Digital Technologies

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:03 pm

If I were still an admin I would start the purging now!

Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 908 Location: Central FL

I'm going to refrain from making any comments at the moment, but it looks like this posting really came from a PureDigital IP. Shocked

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:31 pm

I have requested deletion of my "news" post on photo.net:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00HQB0

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:31 pm

Pure Digital, as a show of good faith in dealing with you I have taken the material you have objected to offline, including the sourceforge app.

I feel that what we have done is completely legal, and you are intentionally confusing the issue with bogus copyright claims. To my knowledge nobody here copied and distributed your software. I certainly have not. Rather I reverse-engineered it's algorithm with a clean-room technique that is widely recognized as the preferred method to NOT infringe on someone's copyright.

However, being right and being not hauled into court is two entirely different matters. The material is offline, as you have requested.

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 7:38 pm

Copyright law states:

Quote:

(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

U.S. Code, Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 102

I do not believe that the Challenge/Response process that is used in Pure Digital products is protected by copyright law.

From reading a number of sources it does appear that algorithms could be protected by patent. It would help clarify this if Pure Digital will post the patent number(s) or patent application numbers which cover this mechanism.

Regardless, I am destroying all copies of the LegendSLineApp.zip file which Pure Digital posted on the Internet.

Joined: 26 Nov 2005 Posts: 121 Location: 216.91.62.100

dear puredigital, i have asked hackaday to remove the content. the descition is now in their hands. I have also deleted my content that i downloaded from your servers, because i , being only 14, had found no use in it and i am definitley not wanting to going into any legal battles.

Edit:also removed it from my linux computer and the cd i wrote, used the good old cd shredder on that one, and you can feel free to check my ip adresses and desktops on both computers for any evidence of me not deleting the programs i downloaded from your server

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:03 pm

dear puredigital, i have asked hackaday to remove the content. the descition is now in their hands. I have also deleted my content that i downloaded from your servers, because i , being only 14, had found no use in it and i am definitley not wanting to going into any legal battles.

I have, too, done exactly the same

Joined: 01 Jul 2005 Posts: 1538 Location: is everything

I also agree that nothing untoward has happened here. The only thing we got from your servers was the knowledge of the key length and cipher. Our team did all the rest - from writing the application to tease the key from the C/R pairs, to Cronus - which decrypted the response from the key. There is not any PD copyrighted material in any of these tools.

I disagree strongly with removing Cronus, as I feel it is perfectly legal. While I don't have a beef with PureDigital, and certainly don't want to see the company go under, there are technical solutions available that don't trample on our work.

Specifically - change the key length, use a different cipher, or alter the physical interface like you did with the 510.

Joined: 06 Aug 2005 Posts: 67

Next to first post in this thread I see:

Quote:

puredigital

Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 2

Yet search by this author only shows this thread. Is the count off by one or is there another post I cannot find?

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:57 pm

Well, poop. Now what? We are convinced that we are in the right, but what can we do about it? Is it just a matter of letting PD cool down a bit?

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:02 pm

Rammer,

The puredigital user also posted the exact (I believe) same message in the original thread announcing the challenge/response mechanism discovery. That thread was in the Camera Apps/Developer forum.

That thread was moved offline - so you can't see their other post any more.

Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 908 Location: Central FL

Rammer wrote:

Next to first post in this thread I see:

Quote:

puredigital

Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 2

Yet search by this author only shows this thread. Is the count off by one or is there another post I cannot find?

They (PureDigital) posted in a thread that has since been taken down.

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:05 pm

puredigital wrote:

We at Pure Digital Technologies have to let you all know that this recent behavior has unfortunately passed the line separating cool/fun from completely illegal.
....
Keep up the good (legal) work. Our next generation single-use products (with new security) are now beginning to hit the market.

Thanks for posting in this forum rather than pursuing a more formal legal apparatus. Can we assume a regular dialogue going forward? Also while many here have refused to use my key-catch (only posted on July 4th), I would appreciate some direct comments from Pure Digital on both it and continuous-power methods using Pure Digital stations. Are they more or less legal than a Chinese-wall reverse engineering of code that one might say was seen through a clear window (no one broke any windows).

It would also be great to occasionally get some hints on things like updating firmware (IMO not likely to cause any harm to PD).

I propose working together towards a brighter future for technologically advanced products from Pure Digital.

Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Posts: 9

This is shocking and i am totally surprised that anyone would be involved in such behaviour in this day and age.

Now, in order that i may totally avoid accidently acquiring the program file say, just for example, off p2p, what would the name of the file be that i ought to strictly avoid?

He adopted a most pious look at this point.

Joined: 19 Jan 2006 Posts: 340 Location: Northern KY

In the intrest of avoiding any legal persuits, I also have deleted all content obtained from your site.
I also echo brite-eye, in the hopes that we can both benefit from each other. This has been a great hobby for me, and will hopefully continue to be!

Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:26 pm

brite_eye wrote:

I nominate the new member puredigital to be given admin rights. I would also like to transfer a majority vote (25 to 19) from my post below to the company providing all our fun here.

http://camerahacks.10.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=3362

Wouldn't it be nice to see puredigital in orange.

Please do not respond to nomination here but rather use the above thread which I have quoted from: http://camerahacks.10.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=3698

Joined: 20 Mar 2006 Posts: 485 Location: Indiana-Illinois

Well, shit, I guess that's where my thread went. I'll be changing my aviator now.

Still, posting company secrets on the web?

Once it was opened, there was no putting it back...

Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Posts: 9

your aviator Philip?

Joined: 20 Mar 2006 Posts: 485 Location: Indiana-Illinois

IANAL, and this ain't legal advice, but a quick response:

puredigital wrote:

Our code and algorithms are proprietary and protected by copyrights worldwide. We think you know that (1) it has been more than 15 years since a copyright notice has been required in the US, and much longer outside the US and (2) copyright protection has nothing to do with security or ease of access.

Ah, but you were distributing the file via FTP. After we got the original file (distributed by you, not us) the algorithm was discovered, and the program reverse engineered using clean room technology. Our software is open-source, so feel free to check for your copyrighted code. You won't find it. Your algorithm was a standard one, and you have no patent protection.

This might qualify as a trade secret, but posting your trade secret on a public website probably makes your claim null and void.

puredigital wrote:

Yes, one of our folks may have accidentally left the virtual window less than fully secure. But, most of you wouldn't think it was okay to climb through an unlocked window of our office and steal our things (and if you would, well, get ready for some jail time). The reality is... the same thing applies here, no matter how stupid you think we've been.
Our ftp files are our property and downloading them (as well as posting them and screwing around with them) is a clear violation of our copyrights, not to mention a variety of other federal and state civil and criminal laws.

Analogies muddle the issue. The fact is, you posted the files for download. We can't sue your ass for downloading the form you just posted on. That would be absurd. You can't sue us for downloading the program you posted on an open website.

puredigital wrote:

In addition to copyrights, it is totally clear from your postings on this site that everyone was well aware that any lapse on our part was an unintentional mistake and that all the downloaded material is proprietary and confidential.

We were throwing theories out there. None of us were aware of anything for sure. Besides, that shouldn't affect anything.

puredigital wrote:

It is not okay to misappropriate our confidential info (and it doesn't take much skill to steal versus really hack).

We didn't steal anything, and making fun of us doesn't change the situation. Truth is, it doesn't take much skill to lock down an FTP server either.

puredigital wrote:

You all know very well that we are not litigation crazy (in fact, just the opposite). We welcome this group and your efforts; so long as they remain legal efforts.

Accordingly, we want you to know that it is not our desire to haul anyone into court (yes, we have the IP addresses from our logs). However, the extent of the damage (and our appropriate response) will likely depend on how fast all this information (and anything any of you have derived from it) is removed from this and any other sites as well as deleted from all your machines and storage media.

Well, none of us really want a legal battle, so even though you have no legal standing, we're probably stuck. Frivolous litigation and threats win again! I guess I should thank you...

puredigital wrote:

This really needs to happen TODAY; hopefully that will avoid the worst of the potential damage and can be the end of it.

I think you must be new to this whole "internet" thing...

Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 908 Location: Central FL

While it's impossible to stuff the genie back in the bottle, you'd be surprised what keeping a diligent watch over the forums can prevent. Sure, someone could take information he's cached and develop his own unlocking utility, but would he risk potentially being sued over it? I sure wouldn't.

And you can bet any post about mirrors, torrents or any other creative way of trying to share an unlocking utility will be sent to that big forum in the sky faster than you can say "deleted".

Joined: 20 Mar 2006 Posts: 485 Location: Indiana-Illinois

Tashammer wrote:

your aviator Philip?

It was a picture of some guy (Ariel I believe) from pure digital that I pulled from the FTP site. The thread I was talking about was one that I made which suggested that we should use their faces as our pictures just give them something to laugh about if they drop by.

Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Posts: 9

Quote:

It was a picture of some guy (Ariel I believe) from pure digital that I pulled from the FTP site. The thread I was talking about was one that I made which suggested that we should use their faces as our pictures just give them something to laugh about if they drop by.

ah, thank you. The Pandora image you just used was rather good.

Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 908 Location: Central FL

philip wrote:

The thread I was talking about was one that I made which suggested that we should use their faces as our pictures just give them something to laugh about if they drop by.

About those pictures: Even if they inadvertantly posted them online, they're still protected by copyright. Of course, I think PureDigital's art department might appreciate the irony.

The original source:

Joined: 02 Sep 2005 Posts: 136

I'm sorry. I also have to say that PD's threats are full of a bunch of BS. While I don't think they could win in court, they could sure waste alot of someones money trying it.

I also think it's a niave view that removing the information from this site will stop things. Maybe slow them down...but very little. There are hundereds of files out there that much larger companies want gone, but anyone can find them easily with a quick net search. If Microsoft can't remove keygens from the Internet, what hope does PD have?

If I were PD....I would use this opertunity to make some money. I would be willing to buy a development kit from PD. An SDK for developing applications on the cams that have already been compromised. I understan that future cams need to be secured, but the ones that are in the wild now are lost to us. Grow a community of PD developers. Keep selling a cam that can be hacked and further developed. All it takes is a few good apps and people will pay anything for a camera to use them on.

You can't put the genie back in the bottle, at least make him your freind.