I understand that it isn’t the TRADITIONAL warez (where they give you the software without it’s protection or a method by which you can use it in an illegal manner), but Macromedia frowns on people decompiling Flash (They would have provided a Flash Decompiler with Flash MX if they were ok with it) They probably knew that adding such a tool designed to view people’s code would cause an uproar in the community.
No, I don’t have stats, but anyone with a brain knows that these people won’t be decompiling movies to “learn” the code. They want to take it; it’s nature, “why do work when someone did it for me?” These people need to pickup a book and read.
I understand that it isn’t the TRADITIONAL warez (where they give you the software without it’s protection or a method by which you can use it in an illegal manner), but Macromedia frowns on people decompiling Flash (They would have provided a Flash Decompiler with Flash MX if they were ok with it) They probably knew that adding such a tool designed to view people’s code would cause an uproar in the community.
No, I don’t have stats, but anyone with a brain knows that these people won’t be decompiling movies to “learn” the code. They want to take it; it’s nature, “why do work when someone did it for me?” These people need to pickup a book and read.
I just disagree here, but its just me, and I don’t have to explain to some exec that someone just stole the product our company has been working on for the last year.
But here is my last say on this subject, if someone is that good, that others want to see how they did things, thats a compliment. You don’t see bit-101 trying to hide his stuff, he wants to show it off so he releases the flas. Not the same thing as decompiling it but still showing how it was done nonetheless.
If Macromedia is so against it, where are the lawsuits? Chances are the swf file format is not copyrighted, why else would other products have access to it, ming, libswf, etc…
lol. Thats like saying “If ever single music artist was so against the illegal download of their music, how come they aren’t out there suing fans left and right?”
Macromedia’s reputation would be hurt if they were known as the sotware giant who religiously pursued to prosecute people to the fullest extent of the law. I’m sure they’d rather go after people who have enough earnings to cover their lawyer fees, such as other software giants or not.
Im all for Open Source, it helps the community, that’s fine. But when I make some 5 month project work, and someone rips my work, permission or not, they’ve no right to do it; and I don’t take it as a compliment.
If I wanted my work for public use, I’d develop a license for it. It could be a free license with stipulations, however, then I’d have more control over what my code can and cannot be used for. What if you saw your code in some porno Flash movie? And they gave you credit for it nonetheless? It’s degrading to ones reputation, and disrespectful to take one’s work without even asking permission.
Maybe it’s the Italian in me, but I can’t stand disrespect. Respect is earned, and is something I don’t just go handing out. I know why these people want to decompile flash; they can tell me elsewise til they are blue in the face, but all they want to do is rip someone’s work.
When I see something that looks similar to someone else’s work, it’s best to bring to attention the similarities first before accusations are made; here it sounds more like a confession… If this thread stays, it condones via SitePoint’s overall belief that they are fine with supplying people with information to break copyrights and/or EULAs
You’ve no doubt visited main stream Flash community sites like Flashkit.com and guru.co.uk… they promote this software through advertising (Actionscript viewer decomposer etc.) and are any of the respected Flash developers who visit these sites in an uproar about it? of coarse not. - as several of the posts in this thread point out there’s no safe way to protect front-end files from deconstruction.
The point i was making was more to do with preventing pointless censorship than lambasting some kid for asking about decompilers.
Thats just the way I see it, I don’t do it nor have I ever even used one of these alleged tools of thievery, I am just with Chas on this one, its not up to you or me to say whether its okay to use these things, leave that to the lawyers. Censoring a forum because someone asks how to get one is just plain wrong.
Comment: I know some people feel hot about this… on the HTML-authoring newsgroups the thread about “How can I hide my HTML!?” is big too.
My take? “There are no secrets.” Your talents are in your responsiveness to the situation you’re in, and no one can duplicate that. With digital content it’s difficult to enforce a social contract… the real value isn’t in the bits, it’s in the relationships.
SWF, like PDF, is publicly documented. Readers are requested to respect certain privacy bits, but you can’t make them respect those privacy bits (“Free Dmitry” and GhostScript aside).
Both “How can I make my SWF difficult to play elsewhere?” and “How can I make it difficult for others to understand my scripts?” are answerable questions… lots of previous discussion to reap here.
(btw, “open source” usually means that it’s not only publicly-documented, but also subject to individual modification. It’s hard for me to see how you can make mutant SWFs if they must play back in a widely-distributed player of known capability.)
Posted by: [color=#0000ff]John Dowdell[/color]172.139.165.7Unregistered on Sunday, May 19, 2002
With good reason, 2advanced’s got to be the most ripped off Flash design going - not because (as far as i know) anyone deconstructed there work - but simply because they copied the basic functionality and artwork.
As H mentioned deconstructing a SWF, rebranding it and passing it off as your own work is illegal.
Anytime, but the way I learned was hanging in the forums and answering questions. Besides who are you talking to, didn’t you build plasmapages? That site kicks ***.
freddy - by all means, I want to hear the points everyone has; that’s what forums are for. Nobody is dictated by my laws, and vice versa. I’m here for the free exchange of ideas.
Chas - I can’t fight people making software that allows people to view and steal source code, but community sites such as SitePoint allowing such posts is as much as condoning the behavior. The initial poster now has what he needs to steal all the code he wants. Why not remove this thread to prevent more people from gaining the knowledge to steal other’s works?
If not, lets add a “Warez” Forum Channel, where we can all talk about stealing work, cracking files, promoting warez and other “grey” subjects.
I would first like to apologize for resurrecting such an old thread. I had forgotten about this thread shortly after I started it and never got to read all the responses until tonight when I was searching for another thread that I started and noticed all the replies on this one.
This may be hard to believe, but I honestly was not looking to steal or modify anyone else’s work and pass it off as my own or publish it in any way. I really did want to just see how some more involved Flash sites worked and I was not under the assumption that it was in any way illegal or even wrong. I considered it similar to viewing HTML. I now see that there are some differences between viewing the source for SWF and websites. Although, I do believe my original intentions were exactly the same as when I view HTML: not to steal, not to use as my own creation
Again,
I am sorry for the uprising this thread has caused. I suggest that it not be deleted, but that’s not up to me. Any questions, feel free to PM me
I have a very strong conviction against stealing which makes this discussion very important to me. Yet, I am not convinced that watching how another programmer builds their work is stealing. There is a lot to be said for the most recent post (albeit 39 months ago! ) of the original poster.
I read books on occasion and learn from the content and writing style of the book so that when the time comes for me to write my own content, I have experience that I have assimilated from these books to draw from, combine with my own patterns of thought, and write original creative information.
An electrician comes to my house and I watch how he fixes my light socket so that I can perform the same method myself to future light sockets that need fixing.
A person visits a building under construction and studies certain aspects of the building’s construction to learn how it is done. Perhaps they stick around the whole time and watch as the master builder lays the foundation, organizes the materials, and assembles the building so that someday they can become a builder of buildings themselves. Is the person breaking the law or violating any kind of ethics or morality? A free country means that we have the ethical and moral right to watch and learn these kinds of things from others. That is the entire driving force of our society, to learn from each other and build from each other’s experience. Now, for the visitor to come by and slap a label on the building and call it their own without buying it would be wrong. But learning how to build the building so that they can build their own building is not wrong.
I want someone to tell me why I am wrong in such a way that I can feel satisfied about the idea of not using an actionscript viewer to learn better actionscript and discover all the tricks that expert actionscript programmers learn through experience. If someone explicitly says not to learn from their work, as the master builder might tell the visitor to take a hike, I can gladly comply with their wishes. But I know a lot of friendly personalities out there who would gladly show the visitor around and explain how things are done.
- not because (as far as i know) anyone deconstructed there work - but simply because they copied the basic functionality and artwork.
) of the original poster.