Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Website Impounded

fitnesssf.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 156 posts

Re: Website Impounded

#101

Post by dzlobin »

DanBC wrote: post #100
zdw wrote: post #35

I don't see the problem with this. People deserve to be paid for the work they do, and time they expend, which is irreplaceable. If you take your car to the shop and can't pay for the work to be done, they put a mechanic's lien on it, and impound the car until the work is paid for. This is no different from that method, which is totally legal. Similarly, I've met software developers who set timebombs in custom softwa…

> Similarly, I've met software developers who set timebombs in custom software they write for companies, with an easy to install patch that gets released when that company pays it's bill. Not paying your bills is not legal, and the designer has a legal option. Putting a timebomb in the software is also not legal, and probably a criminal offence in some places.

Can you provide a source for your last point there?

Re: Website Impounded

#102

Post by prawn »

seyfarth wrote: post #6

This is unprofessional.

From the developer or the client? I have little sympathy for clients who are given countless opportunities to pay their bills and yet keep ignoring them.

Re: Website Impounded

#103

Post by koenigdavidmj »

npsimons wrote: post #81
ultramundane8 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's say that the customer always pays on time and the developer did build this sort of time bomb. (And let's assume no technical knowledge on the part of the customer. Therefore, the time bomb is never discovered.) Are you saying that the relationship was negatively affected? I would claim that the developer could mistrust the customer without elsewhere mistreating them.

There are way, way, way too many ways for this to go wrong. What if you are indisposed (in the hospital, dead, etc) when it comes time to apply the patch? What if an attacker finds the security hole and exploits it before you apply the patch? And don't tell me this isn't a security hole (eg, a backdoor), because it could easily be or become one. Knowingly delivering compromised software is flat out unethical and bord…

This seems much the same as a DRM mechanism on a single-player game that requires a live network connection to phone home to the server. In either case, you have software refusing to function unless its creator gives approval. The only difference is that this is known to the player of the game.

Re: Website Impounded

#104

Post by DoubleCluster »

DanBC wrote: post #100
zdw wrote: post #35

I don't see the problem with this. People deserve to be paid for the work they do, and time they expend, which is irreplaceable. If you take your car to the shop and can't pay for the work to be done, they put a mechanic's lien on it, and impound the car until the work is paid for. This is no different from that method, which is totally legal. Similarly, I've met software developers who set timebombs in custom softwa…

> Similarly, I've met software developers who set timebombs in custom software they write for companies, with an easy to install patch that gets released when that company pays it's bill. Not paying your bills is not legal, and the designer has a legal option. Putting a timebomb in the software is also not legal, and probably a criminal offence in some places.

Providing a time-limited version for testing certainly is legal. Just make sure your client knows this and it's in the contract. Display a notice like "Note: this beta version of the software will not run after 1-4-2013".

Re: Website Impounded

#105

Post by wonderyak »

This is probably as good a time as any to rehash Mike Montiero's talk 'Fuck You, Pay Me' http://vimeo.com/22053820

I've been instructed to do things like this by past employers and I've never been comfortable with it. There are other avenues to persuing payment for services than defacing someone's property (assumption on my part, admittedly) and creating a firestorm of hatred to be imposed upon them in other mediums and venues.

To me, this is childish and an attempt at trying the easy way out of a situation.

Always have contracts, always get paid in installments. If you cannot get those things from clients, then you do not want them as clients.

Re: Website Impounded

#106

Post by mgkimsal »

chc wrote: post #58
mgkimsal wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And 'legal' protection means waiting years in courts, then potentially years more to collect on that judgement (assuming you actually win). I don't know the story behind this, but they may have already waited months before taking this sort of action. And as someone else said - really? An SF-based company contracted with someone in Germany to do their website? Seems to be they were doing this on purpose, to avoid payi…

Does small claims court really take years? I haven't needed to directly interact with it before, but that was not my impression from acquaintances who have to go there quite often.

"small claims" generally only deals with issues under $5000

Re: Website Impounded

#107

Post by logn »

DanBC wrote: post #100
zdw wrote: post #35

I don't see the problem with this. People deserve to be paid for the work they do, and time they expend, which is irreplaceable. If you take your car to the shop and can't pay for the work to be done, they put a mechanic's lien on it, and impound the car until the work is paid for. This is no different from that method, which is totally legal. Similarly, I've met software developers who set timebombs in custom softwa…

> Similarly, I've met software developers who set timebombs in custom software they write for companies, with an easy to install patch that gets released when that company pays it's bill. Not paying your bills is not legal, and the designer has a legal option. Putting a timebomb in the software is also not legal, and probably a criminal offence in some places.

Taking someone to small claims court over state lines is exceedingly difficult, let alone in another country.

How is a "timebomb" not legal? I think Microsoft call its version of this "Genuine Advantage". And the shareware community calls this a Trial Period.

Re: Website Impounded

#108

Post by mratzloff »

chc wrote: post #58
mgkimsal wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And 'legal' protection means waiting years in courts, then potentially years more to collect on that judgement (assuming you actually win). I don't know the story behind this, but they may have already waited months before taking this sort of action. And as someone else said - really? An SF-based company contracted with someone in Germany to do their website? Seems to be they were doing this on purpose, to avoid payi…

Does small claims court really take years? I haven't needed to directly interact with it before, but that was not my impression from acquaintances who have to go there quite often.

It's not small claims unless this consultant did something wrong.

Re: Website Impounded

#109

Post by chc »

mgkimsal wrote: post #106
chc wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does small claims court really take years? I haven't needed to directly interact with it before, but that was not my impression from acquaintances who have to go there quite often.

"small claims" generally only deals with issues under $5000

Ah, I think around here it's $10000, but you're right that it looks like $5000 is normal. Good point.

Re: Website Impounded

#110

Post by DanBC »

DoubleCluster wrote: post #104
DanBC wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Similarly, I've met software developers who set timebombs in custom software they write for companies, with an easy to install patch that gets released when that company pays it's bill. Not paying your bills is not legal, and the designer has a legal option. Putting a timebomb in the software is also not legal, and probably a criminal offence in some places.

Providing a time-limited version for testing certainly is legal. Just make sure your client knows this and it's in the contract. Display a notice like "Note: this beta version of the software will not run after 1-4-2013".

Well, that's just a time limit and obviously there's nothing wrong with that.

But the concept of a time bomb is that it's hidden and can cause harm at some point.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic_bomb)

Post reply on HN