Article 16646 of comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:
Path: smoke!adm!lhc!mimsy!haven.umd.edu!purdue!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!mcsun!ukc!jet!kr
From: kr@jet.uk (ken reed)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d,comp.binaries.ibm.pc.archives
Subject: Irregularities in Foley ExtraDOS utilities?
Message-ID: <1991Jul25.135831.6232@jet.uk>
Date: 25 Jul 91 13:58:31 GMT
Organization: Joint European Torus
Lines: 104
Xref: smoke comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:16646 comp.binaries.ibm.pc.archives:331

This is a bit long (100 lines) but please bear with me as it makes
sense here to start at the beginning ... Thanks.

I am a relatively new user of PCs so, as you might expect, once I had
discovered the files available at archive sites I was having a good
browse through to see what's available. Anyway, I came across a
package called the "ExtraDOS Toolbox" by Foley Hi-Tech Systems and,
while browsing through its contents, I got the distinct feeling I'd
already just seen identical programs in my browsing.

Now I didn't give this much thought as there does seem to be a lot of
similar stuff around - until I saw the following mail in an
information file in the Garbo archives (this edited extract is
reproduced here with the kind permission of the author, David
Kirschbaum, and the Garbo moderator, Timo Salmi).

> From: David Kirschbaum 
> Subject: XDOS320.ZIP - ExtraDOS: Adds the commands that DOS left out
>
> A *huge* package called XDOS320.ZIP was recently uploaded to the
> SIMTEL20 <MSDOS.SYSUTL> directory.  It's a collection of DOS
> utilities.
>
> Extracted from EXTRADOS.TXT:
>>
>>  ExtraDOS is a compilation of tools useful to Microsoft DOS users.
>>  I originally wrote these tools under MS-DOS because I found a need
>>  for them and there were no commercially available products which
>>  provided these functions.  <further text deleted>
>>
>>  The ExtraDOS utilities are Copyright (c) 1985-91 by Foley Hi-Tech
>>  Systems. These programs are not public domain, but are "shareware."
>
> Ok, so far so good.  Until I started looking at some of these
> programs.  Then something smelled fishy.  I've worked with public
> domain utilities for a *long* time, tweaked a fair share of them
> myself, and (again and again) these Foley utilities seemed familiar:
>
> <further text deleted>

David then goes on to mention specific similarities between Foley
software and other programs.

Well, as I had already noticed the same thing, I thought I'd have a
closer look at some of the files.  So, what I did was dis-assemble
the Foley programs and the "originals" and then did a diff on them.
Here are some files I matched (almost 100%) against the code
sections (the data sections are different, of course, due to the
different copyright strings):
 
 ALLSUB		This matched a program called XALL that appeared in
		PC magazine volume 9, number 3. You can find it in the
		garbo archives in the file pcmag/vol9n03.zip.
 
 BOOTPAST	This matched BT (BootThru) by Bill Gibson. It can be
		found in the garbo file bootutil/bt105.zip.
 
 FILEINFO	This matched Michael Mefford's DIRNOTES. The garbo file
 		name is dirutil/dirno120.zip.
 
 NO		This matched the program of the same name published
		in PC Magazine,	May 1986.

 TURBOBAT	This matched Doug Boling's BAT2EXEC available
 		in the garbo file batchutil/bat2ex13.zip.
 
I stopped looking at this point. (By the way, I gave the garbo file
references just because that's the files I compared against - but I
would expect the same match on the versions from any archive site.)

Also, I chatted to David Kirschbaum and found he was doing a similar
investigation and finding the same thing. For example he found that
CHIMES matched exactly with Nifty James' "Famous Chimer Program" v1.0
(NJCHIME1.ZIP).

Now, when people tackle the same problem I might expect similar
solutions but a byte-by-byte match seems a bit unusual and I was
wondering how this might be. Perhaps it's pure chance :-) or maybe
the original authors have sold the source to Foley (although he
claims to have written them).

Now, I must admit, I have nagging doubts about this package and, not
wanting to rush in and make a fool of myself with (perhaps) silly
accusations, thought I'd ask the network if anyone can provide some
feedback on this and let me know what's happening. For example, I
know nothing of US copyright law so, it may be for all I know, simply
that anything published in a magazine can be claimed by anyone :-)

Also, if anyone can provide e-mail addresses for any of the above
mentioned authors (or Ziff Communications for PC magazine) please
pass them on. Then I can get the story "straight from the horses
mouth" as it were.

By the way, I've posted this to cbip.d and cbip.archives because,
although mostly relevant to the archives group, the problem
originated long before the group was in existence so it seemed
appropriate to send it to cbip.d too. Please follow-up to only the
cbip.d group, thanks.

-- 
- Ken Reed, Joint European Torus, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, UK
  kr@jet.uk
- Disclaimer: Please note that the above is a personal view and should not 
  be construed as an official comment from the JET project.

Article 16678 of comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d:
Path: smoke!adm!hsdndev!wupost!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!fk03+
From: fk03+@andrew.cmu.edu (Frank Eugene Kietzke)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: PD vs. free (was Re: Irregularities in Foley ExtraDOS utilities?)
Message-ID: <wcY8qlq00iU_8Dx19o@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: 26 Jul 91 21:01:37 GMT
References: <1991Jul26.133011.1534@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> <1991Jul26.154812.22418@cbfsb.att.com>
	<a_rubin.680545375@dn71>
Organization: Comp & Comm - Data Communications, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Lines: 25
In-Reply-To: <a_rubin.680545375@dn71>

Excerpts from netnews.comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d: 25-Jul-91 Irregularities
in Foley Ext.. ken reed@jet.uk (4663)

> >>
> >>  ExtraDOS is a compilation of tools useful to Microsoft DOS users.
> >>  I originally wrote these tools under MS-DOS because I found a need
> >>  for them and there were no commercially available products which
> >>  provided these functions.  <further text deleted>
> >>


Excerpts from netnews.comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d: 26-Jul-91 Re: PD vs. free
(was Re: Ir.. Arthur Rubin@dsg4.dse.be (1019)

> Agreed.  (Perhaps what Foley is doing here (apparently changing ID
> strings only) is wrong, but not actionable.)

Actually, I believe that the question here is whether plagerism is
actionable.  Since, by claiming that he wrote them (see the first
exerpt) he has claimed the works of others (Public domain or not) as his
own.  I do believe that is grounds for a plagerism suit.  (opinion of
one backfence lawyer to another)

Frank