RE: Concern about the latest Window Eyes scripting move
- From: "Pratik Patel" <pratikp1@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:23:10 -0500
Make scripts open-source and you can avoid most of those legal concerns.
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris Hofstader
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 10:18 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Concern about the latest Window Eyes scripting move
Most especially the lone hackers would have no chance to pay a legal team to
defend a product defect case. If WE scripting became a big enough industry
that a whole company could be based upon it they would probably need to
create some kind of massively limited license (like those on most commercial
software) and still be prepared to get slapped by lawyers here and abroad.
cdh
_____
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dennis Brown
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 9:24 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Concern about the latest Window Eyes scripting move
Great point, Chris. The competition, especially if they can afford
warranty-based software, would use it as a wedge against the product of
those who cannot afford the potential legal costs.
Thanks,
Dennis Brown
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Hofstader <mailto:chris.hofstader@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Doug Geoffray <mailto:geoffray@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 6:57 AM
Subject: RE: Concern about the latest Window Eyes scripting move
Having worked for GNU in the stone ages when we had to create the "No
Warrantee" for our software, I should state that placing any kind of
warrantee on a program from which one does not expect to generate a lot of
income will be very difficult and possibly expensive.
In some EU nations, some individuals have filed claims against all major
screen readers for being defective products for their disproportionate
number of bugs when compared to the mainstream software products. If a lone
hacker places a warranty on his work, he can get screwed in the worst of
ways which would be a huge reason not to make such scripts in the first
place. Using the GNU "No Warranty" and allowing an informal review board to
check the source and give an unofficial Good Housekeeping stamp would be the
way to go. No one wants to increase exposure to the individuals just trying
to do something cool and/or useful, in fact, to the contrary, we want to
encourage people to build these kinds of scripts without the burden of lots
of legal action.
cdh
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Thomas
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 3:54 PM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Concern about the latest Window Eyes scripting move
Ken:
I agree with you you old guru.
Besides the IML should be faster than scripts and what about a compiled
language, faster still?
GW is opening up Com Objects they define as the method of using the scripts
so the interface should limit some potential problems.
Also, Professionally developed Commercial scripts with a warranty would be
the way to go for the applications I'd be interested in and what I would
write if I can master the techniques.
I know you are one of the JAWS Scripting gurus and look forward to your
comments as GW gets rolling.
Rick USA
----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Perry <mailto:whistler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 3:26 PM
Subject: RE: Concern about the latest Window Eyes scripting move
Well this is true depending on how they did it. For example they can limit
the objects a person can use no matter the language so if I only allow you
to use System and System.Windows.Forms then that is it. They most likely
did not limit people so what will have to happen is people will either have
to reject any scripts that are not open source or we will have to have a
page to go to where tested and approved scripts are.
I think this is going to cause other problems as well. It sounds great that
you can code in any language but the problem with being able to code in
anything is there will not be any one support for the scripting language.
Think of how much trouble people are having coding Jaws scripts when they
get started. Now they have added the decision of which language and made it
so you don't have one unified group to help you access the objects they give
you. True that if you know a language and know how to use com in that
language it is a simple reading of the objects Window-eyes provides but most
scripts are not wrote by professional coders they are wrote by people who
need to be able to use a program that doesn't work. Now it will take more
for these people to find support in what ever they choose to use if they can
find support. It will be interesting to see how they support their
scripting.
If I was them I would say that GW micro as a whole supports VB and C# but
you can code in anything. Then they should put up a page that takes just
those two languages and supports them as well as they can. Further more
they should force authors of the code to submit the code if they want the
scripts on their page. This would allow people to still sell scripts they
just couldn't have it up on GW's page.
Ken
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Greer
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 11:55 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Concern about the latest Window Eyes scripting move
Once I got over the initial shock and amazement at GWMicro's decision to
make Window Eyes scriptable. Especially in such a powerful way as to let it
be scriptable with many different scripting languages, I began to think.
Would that not also open Window Eyes and Windows up to a whole new world of
script based viruses? VBScript and Java Script are after all 2 of the
languages that have that sort of power. It just concerns me a bit that in
GWMicro's rush to become the top screen reader, that they may have actually
open the flood gates a bit too wide.
__________ NOD32 2849 (20080205) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
__________ NOD32 2849 (20080205) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
Other related posts:
