Friday, October 17, 2008

So They're Proprietary Software Thieves, Too?

And that would surprise us because...?

[Via "Mr. X"]
Posted by David Codrea at 10/17/2008 12:23:00 PM

11 comments:

The_Chef said...

I smell a lawsuit and a big one coming ATF's way.

10/17/2008 1:01 PM
Sobiloff said...

I sure hope that Coloseum got the appropriate NDAs and non-competes in place before discussing the software with the BATFE, but it sounds like they may not have. Without those documents they'll have a much more difficult time proving misappropriation of intellectual property. If Coloseum's allegations are true it's pretty slimy behavior by folks in the BATFE, but a common problem. (Similar behavior has been observed by Microsoft, Apple and other large tech companies in the past.)

10/17/2008 2:41 PM
Anonymous said...

Aside from the BATFE antics and the error free aspect; why would I want an electronic copy of a form documenting my purchase of a firearm?

10/17/2008 4:32 PM
Kurt '45superman' Hofmann said...

Anon, as a gun purchaser, you wouldn't (or at least I wouldn't), but for a dealer, whose livelihood (and possibly freedom) rests in part on the absolute compliance with every last, trivial detail of the rules, there would be a great deal to like about such a system.

The way I read it, buyers would be no worse off than we already are (although I acknowledge that there is no excuse, or Constitutional justification, for us to be this badly off). The purchase records are, after all, already kept, and the BATFE already has access whenever they want it.

10/17/2008 5:35 PM
Anonymous said...

Havent't a majority of states now approved of using lethal force to protect one's property? AKA Castle Doctrine, No Duty to Retreat, etc.

Is this different? How?

I am tired to death of these government subsidized motherabusers. As long as they abuse only their mothers I suppose it is a family problem, but illegal I am sure.

When they abuse my mothercountry it becomes my problem. Do they really want to go there?

10/17/2008 8:12 PM
me said...

Do they really want to go there?

it's not like they just started. They've been doing it for, well, since they were conceived from demon seed in the depths of hell.

No ONE can do anything about it. Congress doesn't care unless it's an election year, and then they don't care enough to do anything. Gun owners as a group are too apathetic to actually DO anything besides moan to each other or fire off the occasional letter with the assurances from other gunnies that they'll do the same. Never is a massive protest proposed, and even if one were there would be 1/10000th the turnout pledged for whatever reason.

They know it. We know it. Nothing changes, at least for the better.

10/17/2008 10:27 PM
Anonymous said...

I've seen this before in a situation with government where a company got ripped off in pretty much the same fashion. The court ruled that the information was freely giving and there was no contract that this information was IP. So the case was kicked out of court.
Dirty pool, you bet as dirty as it gets. I'm sure (but have no real way of knowing) the government lawyers were in the background controlling this step by step until the needed information was collected.
Never trust government its filled with bottom feeding parasites that are out to justify themselves and can make up the rules as they go. Fight them if you want but be ready to go up against endless money.

10/18/2008 10:19 AM
Anonymous said...

Blake said...

"I sure hope that Coloseum got the appropriate NDAs and non-competes in place before discussing the software with the BATFE, but it sounds like they may not have. Without those documents they'll have a much more difficult time proving misappropriation of intellectual property. If Coloseum's allegations are true it's pretty slimy behavior by folks in the BATFE, but a common problem."

avgJoe said...

"I've seen this before in a situation with government where a company got ripped off in pretty much the same fashion. The court ruled that the information was freely giving and there was no contract that this information was IP. So the case was kicked out of court."


I think Coloseum Software Corporation has lots of powerful arguments it can make even in the absence of contractual agreements with the ATF like an NDA or non-compete agreement. Due to the nature of ATF's regulatory lock on approving the sale of firearms or other products like computer software and due to ATF's criminal investigation and enforcement powers, Coloseum Software felt that they had no other choice but to allow ATF unfettered access to their source code and proprietary design information. But for ATF's virtual plenary power to deny Coloseum Software access to markets with the wave of a pen or to launch expensive, disabling criminal investigations against Coloseum Software, Coloseum Software would have NEVER allowed ATF access to their proprietary information.

Additionally, there is publicly available video footage that clearly and unequivocally shows ATF making party admissions that its employees have committed perjury in the course of their employment by lying under oath. Coloseum Software was clearly afraid that ATF could fabricate false charges against Coloseum Software and simply lie under oath, thereby securing a wrongful conviction against an innocent party.

Additionally, ATF's well-known practice of refusing to publish testing standards and standards for filling out their forms via regulations in the Federal Register, shows persistent and willful violations of the Notice Requirement of Constitutional Due Process - threatening the very FOUNDATION of a society of Laws.

These and numerous other acts documented by others also demonstrate persistent and willful behavior that violates the Arbitrary and Capricious legal standard of review as applied to administrative agencies.

Clearly, there is something very different from freedom of contract at work here. Something that is very foreign to the concepts of a free society, limited government, and a society of laws.

If the right people get involved in this case, this could end up being a watershed event for the gun rights movement. It may not seem obvious at the moment due to the infuriating wrongs that may have been committed against Coloseum Software, but this issue may be one of the biggest blessings we have been handed in a long time, if the right people get involved.

10/18/2008 7:35 PM
Anonymous said...

Maybe they do have grounds but my hunch is a federal judge is going to kick out saying that they should have had legal advice and anything given was giving freely and was not under contract as IP.
If nothing else, you can bet ATF's lawyers who will be government lawyers just like the judge is, will make this the foundation of their points. Why we didn't taking anything that wasn't freely passed on to us. We had no idea this was IP because if it was it should have had a contract stating such.
A government for the people, by the people, LOL!

10/19/2008 9:58 AM
Anonymous said...

That may be true, but I might present the enemy's arguments a little differently.

One of the reasons the enemy has had so much success in pushing their anti-freedom agenda is that they refuse to even acknowledge that the other side might have any arguments, valid or not. Also, the enemy has been very careful to ridicule us. A good strategy when dealing with people like this is to mirror their strategy back to them. It makes it really hard for them to fight back.

As a result, I think that we may need to do the same. If we ever mention any arguments that might be able to benefit the enemy, I think we might want to do it in a way that belittles the enemy and that counters their alleged arguments with our superior arguments. Of course, we have to be careful not to go over the top and appear to be bullies. We must always present an underlying, emotion-based excuse that justifies belittling the enemy (e.g.; "for the children" or "for freedom"), even if we are not driven by emotions like the enemy appears to be.

Anyhow, it is just something to consider.

:-)

10/19/2008 2:24 PM
Anonymous said...

Well folks, if this is true, then it's wrap. Should government-specified electronic record keeping become a requirement, we will unarguably have national gun registration. All that will be required is an Internet connection and a "policy" change.

10/20/2008 11:47 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)