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

TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

keionline.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 162 posts

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#141

Post by kuschku »

lazaroclapp wrote: post #129
kuschku wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, ISDS – which, obviously, is a way to give up parts of sovereignty (not necessarily bad) – has some specific exceptions that make it unlikely it can be used against the US, instead mostly against the other partners. This gradient of power reminds of the colony-empire relationship of one entity having might over another. (though not nearly comparable, I used it as hyperbole) In a good treaty both the US and any p…

Honest curiosity: which exceptions make it hard to use the ISDS against the US government?

The exception of the US telecommunications market, the US pharmaceutical market from the free trade regulations, for example?

These markets are not part of the free trade deal and not subject to ISDS.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#143

Post by HappyTypist »

usrusr wrote: post #93
Xixi wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany is not part of the TPP, but assuming it were: - probably not as a blanket precondition to allow them to sell cars, - probably yes during the course of a trial if their cars were measured to have too strong emissions. Not a lawyer either.

But think of all those millions of cars VW would sure love to sell in the USA via their soon to be founded Australian subsidiary... Extrapolating this some more, might we even see a pattern emerging where some kind of clever legal offshoring could allow domestic companies to get a stronger position vs their own governments?

Yes. And this is actually one of the benefits of nation states signing the TPP!

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#144

Post by stickfigure »

lafay wrote: post #63
15155 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expounding further - what government agency has the time or money to actually sift through mountains of source code? From a pure financial standpoint, there's no possible way that it isn't cheaper to just measure real emissions than attempt some kind of software analysis for every version of every vehicle on the market. Furthermore, an agency inspecting source code has absolutely no way to tell whether or not that th…

Just as a counterpoint: the Nevada Gaming Commission has plenty of time and money to sift through the source code of every gaming device that gets deployed in NV.

Do we have specific evidence that they actually do sift through the source code? They demand its submission, but how do we know they actually do anything with it? I'm asking this as a serious question.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#145

Post by mikekchar »

belorn wrote: post #133
DannyBee wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You can't distribute it anywhere (under international copyright law)." True. There are two problems. First, this violation is remedied by an action. Normally, that action for an order to comply with the license (not just "stop using it and pay damages"). There is a question whether a court would legally be able to order such a thing anymore. B. As you have identified, "Is that not what is meant by a commercially neg…

Is there any prior case where an court demanded that a party comply with a copyright license? "stop using it or comply with the license" seems to be the obvious step for any infringer.

In the case of the GPL, the "or comply with the license" doesn't even apply. As soon as you violate the license, the license is terminated. This is to stop people from violating the license and then saying, "Ok, Ok, I'll comply" when they are threatened with a lawsuit. In practice, copyright holders usually forgive the other party and offer then a new license, though. So, again from my layman's point of view, I don't think this is an issue since the court can't force the other party to disclose their source code. It can only grant an injunction on distribution.

In every case, the use of the license (and subsequent release of the source code) is a choice. Of course, without choosing to follow the license, you can't distribute the software. As far as I understand, this is by design and the reason why the GPL is so robust.

I also think this is a negotiated license because the GPL specifically says that you don't have to accept it. It is a written offer for a license. Sometimes, if you contact the copyright holder you can get a different license. Usually now. Just because the offer is made to everybody, doesn't mean it is not a negotiation (I don't think... but that's probably where knowledge of the law would come in handy ;-) ).

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#146

Post by e12e »

briandear wrote: post #127
crdoconnor wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This prevents a country from forcing somebody like Microsoft or Apple to give up their source code for "inspection" in order to access their market. Since when is that a good thing?

Since Microsoft and Apple spend hundreds of millions developing that code. To let a country 'inspect' it is to put valuable intellectual property at risk. Would you trust China to inspect your source code for a project you spent millions developing a unique technology? Should Boeing open source their aircraft wing designs? To suggest such is ludicrous. Do you really want governments with access to everyone's source c…

I'm not sure I'd want to allow China to sell a "secure operating system" to government agencies - and not be able to demand source code access as part of the bidding process.

I'm not sure I'd want a US company to supply hardware/OS to schools, and not be able to stipulate source code availability in the contract.

I'm not sure if this is the kind of things that this makes illegal -- but I wouldn't be surprised if it is.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#148

Post by rdancer »

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #3

So in short, if I understand this correctly, the US government (and any other government party to the treaty) will for example be unable to insist that Volkswagen (or any other manufacturer) open source their future emissions control software (as a condition for regulatory compliance) ?

If you cannot analyse the binaries, or, conversely, if the authors cannot obfuscate the source code to the point of being unintelligible, neither of you are worthy as engineers.

Re: TPP banning requirements to transfer or access to source code of software

#150

Post by granos »

15155 wrote: post #132
granos wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have source code then you can tell whether a particular executable was built from said source code. Pull the executable out of the car and also build the source code yourself as instructed by the manufacturer, compare the two binaries. If the binaries don't match, then whatever certification the device needs automatically fails and it cannot be sold. What that means is that later on, if "Something Bad" happens…

To me, this seems like a relatively difficult feat. - Are governments and other regulatory agents going to formally verify compilers? - Are these agencies going to prevent software from being written that doesn't conform to their rigid standards? - Many compilers, technologies in use today aren't perfectly deterministic. Optimizations, flags, etc. can all dramatically affect an emitted binary. - What if I want to use…

The point isn't for regulators to have to sift through code line by line or do something complicated like verifying compilers. I'd propose that the industry can pretty much do whatever they like in terms of technology, so long as it's inspectable and meets other regulations of course. If they can't provide repeatable instructions for building their code then they should not be working on something safety critical anyway.

I'm not familiar with exactly what software regulations exist today for the auto industry, but certifications for repeatable software processes (including build and deploy) are nothing new.

The point is that we should trust the industry to do the right thing, but also maintain our ability to double check. Until something like the VW defeat scandal happens it doesn't make sense to invest the resources needed to really dig in.

Updates and cheating can be detected by requiring service stations to pull software from randomly chosen vehicles during annual inspections. In the US we could use the standard highway funding threats to require states to enact such laws.

Post reply on HN