CA Sues Over DB2 Migration Tool 104
aesoteric writes "Software giant CA has filed suit against an Australian software developer over a program that allegedly enabled companies to migrate off CA database platforms onto IBM DB2. It claimed the software 'reproduced' portions of confidential source and object codes without permission and deprived CA of license fees. CA also disputed claims that its database platform was 'dying.'"
Re:Lock in (Score:3, Interesting)
What is next? Making it illegal for your users to even look at products of your competitors?
No, they're going to target advertising next. You're not allowed to advertise to any of their customers with a competing product. Use of terminology relating to the product, such as "database" will be considered infringement on their IP.
CA's disreputable (acc'ting scandal) (Score:5, Interesting)
"There was always an unsavoury whiff from their stuff." - by AliasMarlowe (1042386) on Friday November 26, @09:47AM (#34349872)
CA's disreputable - See their "ethics" in accounting practices which they got busted for:
PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT:
"Customers know Computer Associates - and, these days, for all the wrong reasons. Just as the company was beginning to shed its reputation as a home for legacy software products that carried an inflated price tag, it was rocked by a series of accounting scandals. An on-going FBI fraud inquiry and investigations by the US Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission have left it reeling, with a power vacuum at the top as over a dozen senior executives have left or been sacked. The allegations centre on internal accounting and sales activities in the years around the turn of the century, and involve the movement of revenues between quarters and product areas, and consequently, the mis-statement of financial results."
FROM -> http://www.information-age.com/articles/290656/the-information-age-interview.thtml [information-age.com]
APK
P.S.=> CA also listed a freeware of mine as a "malware" which was written to help out a fellow forums person I knew at NTCompatible years ago, because he had an OLD version of Apache server on Windows which would not run as a tooltray icon while minimized & it was not implemented as a service he told me (that was so it was not visible onscreen and ran "in the background transparently" which most webservers now, do).
So, in good faith/being a "good neighbor", I wrote it up for he (it's NOT commandline argv/argc parameterizeable either, so it's NOT scriptable) in GUI form (only 2-3 lines of code & works via C/C++ type invisible "spawn" type parameterizations).
Next thing I know? It's out online being classed as a "malware" (1 of around 40 freeware apps I've done over time that did VERY well & were featured in respected publications in good reviews in reputable & respected publications like "Windows IT Pro" Magazine (it was Windows NT Mag back then in the 1990's - early 21st century) & others of like ilk).
Apps that can be used "both ways" get 'victimized' this way (which is like PING via "ping of death", or tools from NIRSOFT (good stuff) &/or SysInternals even (yes, even Dr. Mark Russinovich has had this happen to he (e.g. pstools) as it has myself & Nir Sofer of NIRSOFT) have tools that can be used "for the good" or "the bad", depending on WHO is using them & what they're up to (like a gun, guns don't murder people - other people do).
So, then I took CA's 21 point removal test & passed EVERY SINGLE QUESTION without fail no less, & they would not remove it (but, they had to put it down to "Zero Threat Levels")... I did that on the advice of an attorney (John Lowe of Hiscock & Barclay).
Afterwards when I told the attorney these results, he told me "Yes, you have a WINNING CASE for libel/defamation of character" etc. "and it's worth approx. $150,000 U.S. Dollars", so I said "Well, let's do it then on a 33.3% of the take for you as payment" (keeps attorneys 'motivated' doing it that way, plus, it's no init. money down for retainers etc./et al).
Then, he replied "I can't do this case!" I was like "WHY?!?" & he said "Because larger companies have fleets of attorneys that will 'drag it out' for over a decade and by the time you collect, which you would? The overall COST of doing this would exceed your reward!"...
This is how the REAL world works, if you're not a "Financial Goliath" in other words - there is NO "justice", only money (and if you've got enough to take on the likes of these companies, then, & ONLY THEN, do you get real justice)... makes me ill, because the likes of CA know this, & abuse it! apk
Re:Uh... (Score:3, Interesting)
The catch from what I see is that it does convert your database to DB2, but it acts like a DC server to redirect all functions of your current software to the DB2 database. It becomes the interface from your old applications to the DB2 servers. So, you need to run the 2BDB2 software indefinitely. That software mimics the DC product, so that is where the infringement suit comes in. CA may have a case and those clients using it may indeed need to pay CA for licenses. It is not just a pure onetime conversion.
If you really wish to migrate off, you need to design new software to interface with the DB2, so once your data is safe on DB2, you will not need 2BDB2 afterward.