Skypeopensource2 – Skype client based on reversing Skype 5.5 • Hacker News Board

Re: Skypeopensource2 – Skype client based on reversing Skype 5.5

#121

Post by giancarlostoro » Sun, Sep 04, 2016, 9:14 PM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #117

giancarlostoro wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try to push Mumble over Skype, the main issue with Mumble is that it's not as easy to get into. You spend too much time configuring your client, finding a server, etc. Things that should be fairly trivial. Then you may spend more time figuring out why you're not being heard, or why nobody's hearing you. Mumble is great but there's too much friction involved. I prefer Discord[0] because it's so easy to use by compar…

Can you run your own server to save having try find one; should reduce the lag on one side too.

Most of the issues were mostly in the setup of the hardware. I did run my own server on DO though.

Re: Skypeopensource2 – Skype client based on reversing Skype 5.5

#122

Post by skypeopensource » Mon, Sep 05, 2016, 1:08 AM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #113

michaelmior wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're not going to be a user anymore, then what's the point in reversing the client anyway?

For example, to distribute the system obtained by reverse engineering to your customers or include it in your product; none of this needs your engineers to be actual users of the (possibly competing) service. The interoperability exception in copyright laws is exactly for this purpose, to allow companies to distribute competing products that are interoperable with something that doesn't want others to interoperate. Y…

Thank you for very clear and detail answer.

Re: Skypeopensource2 – Skype client based on reversing Skype 5.5

#123

Post by mSparks » Mon, Sep 05, 2016, 12:23 PM UTC

extra88 wrote: post #120

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any peer-to-peer now, I thought they routed everything through their own servers now?

I don't know. It seems stupid to entirely drop peer-to-peer but maybe that's the case now.

only "stupid" if you are opposed to this:

http://techrights.org/2015/01/02/snowden-leaks-on-spying/

Otherwise, dropping peer to peer is the only way to achieve the projects goals.

Re: Skypeopensource2 – Skype client based on reversing Skype 5.5

#124

Post by Iv » Tue, Sep 06, 2016, 4:19 AM UTC

PieterH wrote: post #97

Iv wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the author said, the files violating copyright are easy to replace. Let Skype ask for it, it will be 2 more days of work. The reason why people want to see a clean room implementation is because they are afraid of patent and anticipate US-like silliness like Oracle claiming copyright on an API. Now that this is a very US-specific issue. If you don't plan to market to US, you can just ignore the issue. I used to wo…

Patents are another issue. Doesn't specifically affect this project. And clean-room implementations have no effect on patent violations or claims. None at all. It is entirely a copyright issue. And the issue here is that the same person who disassembled one codebase then wrote a new, equivalent codebase. Thus the new work is a derived work, or at least a lawyer can argue that easily, and thus distributing it for prof…

> Thus the new work is a derived work, or at least a lawyer can argue that easily

And this is totally stupid. This amounts to claiming that musicians derive their work from others. Of course they do.

Re: Skypeopensource2 – Skype client based on reversing Skype 5.5

#125

Post by michaelmior » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 2:01 PM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #113

michaelmior wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're not going to be a user anymore, then what's the point in reversing the client anyway?

For example, to distribute the system obtained by reverse engineering to your customers or include it in your product; none of this needs your engineers to be actual users of the (possibly competing) service. The interoperability exception in copyright laws is exactly for this purpose, to allow companies to distribute competing products that are interoperable with something that doesn't want others to interoperate. Y…

I'll agree that illegal was a stretch especially since IANAL. I will say that is at least unethical by my personal standards. On a practical note, I'd much rather see people investing their time in making better alternatives than reverse engineering.