xdp?

curtis_ray · Post by **curtis_ray** » Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:17 pm

that may very well be the case fragger,i was speaking in regards to an official statement from sega.planetweb,isao..which to my knowledge has never been issued on any site must less sega.com,planetweb.com or isao.net.

if there was a response to dcemulation query on the issue maybe it should be copied and stickied so as to answer all questions regarding the issue to anyone thinking of posting on it.

but ive never seen soohoo speak in a negative way about it in posts at onlineconsoles(where he still posts on a semi-regular basis),nor at the yahoo group dreamcastbrowsers(where he has a group moderated contact),nor on the official planetweb mailing list,nor here for that matter.

just my observation

az_bont · Post by **az_bont** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 7:52 am

Fragger wrote:
curtis_ray wrote:but neither isao nor planetweb enforced these rights.even with ken soohoo ceo of planetweb still selling a limited number of planetweb 3 discs,still hasnt complained one single time about planetweb being customized,distributed or in competition with his for sale version while posting on friendly sites that promote xdp such as consolegaming and even thru thrid party message posting at dcbg the largest dreamcast browser group on the net.

so to me atleast it is more of a technical legality than it is an enforced one.
The DCEmulation staff contacted PlanetWeb and got an official answer from Ken Soohoo in May 02, 2006. It is illegal to make the browsers available for download, modified or not.

Psilocybin Dreams and XDP (XDreamPassport) are not based on PlanetWeb's browser.

curtis_ray · Post by **curtis_ray** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 2:18 pm

az_bont wrote:Psilocybin Dreams and XDP (XDreamPassport) are not based on PlanetWeb's browser.

psilocybin dreams and xdp both have versions of planetweb in them that have been modified via graphics skinning and html/javascript changes.

being the primary launch vehicle at startup isnt the issue,its whether they are included.older versions of both contain and use planetweb as primary start browser,later editions use sega's ginsu menu engine to launch all the browsers.but either way they all contain a modified version of planetweb.

edit:

dcemulation has already made its decision about custom browsers of any kind,not just xdp/psd.so atleast its cool to be able to discuss it in a friendly manner without flames etc,or the topic being locked.discussion is one thing,having it hosted is where the problems occur.

sonicblur · Post by **sonicblur** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:31 pm

curtis_ray wrote:older versions of both contain and use planetweb as primary start browser,later editions use sega's ginsu menu engine to launch all the browsers.but either way they all contain a modified version of planetweb.

Huh?
I've got a CD-R here that I labelled XDPr4, it does not use Planetweb to boot. It goes straight into DreamPassport. So I don't think you can say they all contain it, unless you mean all current ones.
I've also gone one labeled XDPv761, not sure which one is which. I can't check right now

Smurph · Post by **Smurph** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 6:50 pm

sonicblur wrote:
curtis_ray wrote:older versions of both contain and use planetweb as primary start browser,later editions use sega's ginsu menu engine to launch all the browsers.but either way they all contain a modified version of planetweb.
Huh?
I've got a CD-R here that I labelled XDPv3, it does not use Planetweb to boot. It goes straight into DreamPassport. So I don't think you can say they all contain it, unless you mean all current ones.

v3 has a nifty menu which you can select between DP and PW.

curtis_ray · Post by **curtis_ray** » Mon Sep 04, 2006 10:05 pm

heh i think thats what i just said..that the newer versions use the ginsu stand alone menu system from the demo discs,while the older ones relied on ginsu thru planetweb.and that they all new and old contain a version of planetweb customized.

edit:

either way,from the looks of bluecrabs dcrpg project screens..online capibility via homebrew isnt very far away.not saying that means a homebrew browser is close at hand..but it definately is coming within some sort of reach...that is,if it isnt totally broadband adapter related..the screens do however show some sort of net function.

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Fri Sep 08, 2006 7:21 am

Fragger wrote:The DCEmulation staff contacted PlanetWeb and got an official answer from Ken Soohoo in May 02, 2006. It is illegal to make the browsers available for download, modified or not.

2006 or 2005 ?

Anyway, I am curious about reading his exact answer and also I wonder why they're still sending them out for free but don't tolerate to have them available for download.

curtis_ray · Post by **curtis_ray** » Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:01 am

i trust that dcemulation got the email until it is proven otherwise.even without such an email the site has made a collective decision it seems about it and im comfortable with it.

although i cant see what would be harmful to having a network related help section that allows connection,feature related questions as they pertain to all varities of the browsers...not just xdp,but not excluding it either..as pertains to those basic issues.no download requests etc..just a simple dc network section.

fatheadpi · Post by **fatheadpi** » Mon Nov 27, 2006 4:06 pm

Hello Curt and SonicBlur. Long time, no see. Hope this finds you well.

Thought I'd toss in my two cents on the issue, being as I was the main push behind Psiloycbin Dreams.

1. XDP stands for XRips, Inc. Dream Passport. It's a nifty name I thought up while trying to locate a better web browser worthy of translation. It also makes a face of a guy laughing and sticking out his toungue. I liked this on a personal level because it showed that despite Sega's lack of support for it's customers, we could take their own works and make a better product for free.

2. XDP and PSD never used pay-to-own versions of PlanetWeb or DreamPassport that I knew of. When I left the Team after releasing PSD 1.0, we had PlanetWeb 2.6 as the loader, which was freely available. The PW 2.6 we used was Curt's DCTV tune-up, which made for a far better frontend.. It gave you the option to load Curt's translation of a version of DP 2.0, a ton of random homebrew software, or what was XDP at the time. These were all bundled under the collective name I thought up, "Psilocybin Dreams".

3. In the later versions I have seen, Ex and Curt further modified the PW 2.6 loader to create a more attractive frontend. Homebrew and DP 2.0 support was dropped in the interest of image size. DP 3.16 or 3.17 was used exclusively as the XDP core. More ini and pvr files were added and translated.

2. Psilocybin Dreams / XDP has gone through several extreme variations, as did XDP. From what I can remember of the last XDP release I saw, it was mostly Ex's work. I don't how how much Curt was involved with XDP at this point. It looked like they were still using PW 2.6 or the Ginsu loader as a frontend.

I would be rather interested to see this e-mail if anyone can actually produce it.

- Fathead P.I.

curtis_ray · Post by **curtis_ray** » Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:57 pm

hey fatheadpi wasup

been a long time.

i have not had any association with xdp in a very long time.

im mostly making textures/mods for my favorite star trek game Armada II while i wait on my copy of legacy...heh..

if ya play the game here's a few mods of mine for it with screens..

http://armada2.filefront.com/file/Onlin ... ment;72522

http://armada2.filefront.com/file/Onlin ... ck_2;72636

anywayz...

havent did much on dc in a long time.

good to hear from ya again

as for the email,well i would say it's a moot issue nowadays.

mankrip · Post by **mankrip** » Sat Dec 23, 2006 1:12 pm

Actually, the e-mail only mentions the Planetweb browser. Looks like I didn't pay enough attention when writing that reply.

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 6:42 pm

I'd love to see XDP/PSD hosted at DCEvolution...

Sir Savant · Post by **Sir Savant** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 11:22 am

Does anyone have the email to post?

az_bont · Post by **az_bont** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 8:28 pm

Ken Soohoo wrote:I'm sorry to report that the Planetweb Dreamcast Web Browser contains technology licensed from both RSA and SUN, and neither of them will consent to release this product without payment.

Sincerely,
Ken

However, it is important to note that the patents concerning RSA encryption expired in 2000 in the United States, and the technology was not patentable in most of the rest of the world (according to Wikipedia article on "RSA").

PlanetWeb 3.0 (the commercial release, which has not been used in XDP or PSD) was the only version of the browser to contain anything approaching a proper version of Java. This technology was licensed from Sun Microsystems, and there are press releases available online that state this.

The various versions of DreamPassport supported a very limited version of something referred to as "Java" which seemed to be incompatible with anything created for the Java platforn so far - and I can find no evidence that Sun ever licensed their technology to Sega, which could explain why it doesn't seem to bear much resemblance to Sun's Java. As far as I recall, it was only used for local content (things already on the disc) and not online.

DreamKey, the European version of DreamPassport, features no form of "Java" at all.

This should not be confused with JavaScript, a separate technology available in all of the browsers, which included a number of Dreamcast-specific commands on the Dreamcast (I believe a web page was able to make the controller rumble, and make the VMU display messages etc).

To summarise, Ken Soohoo stated that the reason PlanetWeb could not be released is because it contained technology licensed from Sun and RSA - however, Sun's technology was not contained in any of the XDP or PSD releases, as they relied on the older free versions, and the RSA encryption technology may be freely used by anyone without payment as the relevant patents have expired.

APE · Post by **APE** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 9:30 pm

AFAIK the copyright on DK, PW and DK are still valid and have not been released into the PD. Unless you live in a country where copyright law is lax or are on the high seas any distrobution of the material short of the copyright owners express permission would be illegal.

I never did figure out how noone could just realize how clear cut the issue was. Just because you want something to not be so doesn't make it so.

az_bont · Post by **az_bont** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 10:28 pm

APE wrote:AFAIK the copyright on DK, PW and DK are still valid and have not been released into the PD. Unless you live in a country where copyright law is lax or are on the high seas any distrobution of the material short of the copyright owners express permission would be illegal.

I never did figure out how noone could just realize how clear cut the issue was. Just because you want something to not be so doesn't make it so.

I have never maintained that XDP/PSD are wholly and absolutely legally sound. What I have done is point out the hypocrisy of those individuals who have decided that there are certain "grey area" matters, and others that are clearly illegal, that they are perfectly willing to tolerate, but draw and arbitrary at the custom web browsers.

Why is nobody attacking The Great Giana Sisters sequel, when Nintendo successfully sued to keep it off of store shelves in a number of countries? Or Beats of Rage and the various mods that rely heavily on copyrighted content of other devlopers/publishers? You know, things that actually have a chance of affecting the profits of videogames company, as opposed to the redistribution of a free product they'll mail to anybody who asks. What's the great crime in that - saving Sega the cost of a stamp?

How about avatars? You can argue fair use all you want, but there are no exceptions in copyright law that state its okay to use a copyrighted image without authorisation on a forum to uniquely identify yourself.

What about the discussions of ripping protected CDs and DVDs, including providing instructions and links that violate criminal law in the United States and the EU?

How about the absurdity of a situation where we can discuss how to create copies of Playstation games for use with emulators, but not Dreamcast games for use with emulators? Or that Segagen must not be talked about, but we were perfectly happy to discuss Sega's hacked Saturn emulator, including openly soliciting for links in a public forum?

What especially bothers me is the fact that the browsers were removed on the word of a liar who became bitter when we stated the obvious truth that he couldn't just declare himself the new maintainer of a project he didn't even start (NightStalker).

Worse still is the fact that the only reason there was ever an issue with them on this site is because Metafox decided that his opinion mattered more than anyone else's on this site, and clearly stated that he try his best to remove the browsers from the site. He claimed we were oh-so-bad for violating the copyright of a company who doesn't give a damn for a product they never even charged for in the first place, then he turns around and defrauds dozens of forum members (close to a hundred, if I recall).

Most frustrating of all is the fact that for one release of XDP/PSD we logged over 7000 downloads in a month. The project was the result of thousands of hours of work that took place over several years, amassed for the first time in one place. Yet a handful of ignoramuses declared it nothing more than a quick hack thrown together in a few hours that doesn't count as a meaningful release for the scene because nobody had to use a compiler to make it.

I should also like to state for the record - as now seems as good a time as any - that all of the hard work I have mentioned was not hard work done by me, but by much more commited individuals, of whom there are too many to list here, so I won't try. They took skills far beyond those I possess, both technical and artistic.

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:10 pm

Ken Soohoo wrote:I'm sorry to report that the Planetweb Dreamcast Web Browser contains technology licensed from both RSA and SUN, and neither of them will consent to release this product without payment.

Sincerely,
Ken

That's a very interesting answer. It basicly says that "because of x and y we can't do it with PlanetWeb 3.0, otherwise we would! And: we don't care what happens to any previous versions (without x and y)."

AFAIK the copyright on DK, PW and DK are still valid and have not been released into the PD. Unless you live in a country where copyright law is lax or are on the high seas any distrobution of the material short of the copyright owners express permission would be illegal.

The copyright isn't in question at all as copyright does only really affect the actual commercial use of something.

I can donate a CD by Nirvana to you, that doesn't make the content your intellectual property.

[ ...it's still that of SONY/BMG

]

I never did figure out how noone could just realize how clear cut the issue was.

I don't understand what you mean! What exactly is clear in this issue !? That you may not paint a car you've built yourself using existing parts from the dumb - to donate it to someone ?

Just because you want something to not be so doesn't make it so.

That's exactly what I think too

Just that you want something to be so, and actually ARE making it so.

OneThirty8 · Post by **OneThirty8** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:26 pm

Christuserloeser wrote:
AFAIK the copyright on DK, PW and DK are still valid and have not been released into the PD. Unless you live in a country where copyright law is lax or are on the high seas any distrobution of the material short of the copyright owners express permission would be illegal.
The copyright isn't in question at all as copyright does only really affect the actual commercial use of something.

I can donate a CD by Nirvana to you, that doesn't make the content your intellectual property.

[ ...it's still that of SONY/BMG ]

You can donate a CD by Nirvana to me, and in so doing you transfer your license to listen to that music to me along with the disc. What you cannot do is rip/copy the CD and distribute the content. It doesn't matter if the label is making money from the sale of the CD or not. The copyright holder has the right to decide how their copyrighted materials are distributed. Do I think that copyright law sometimes goes overboard? Yeah, I think that I should be allowed to make backups of rare or limited edition DVD movies, but the DMCA says otherwise. With that said, in the case of distributing copyrighted works I think the law is fair even though it sometimes keeps us from doing what we would like to do as in the case of the browsers.

Post by **Christuserloeser** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:39 pm

OneThirty8 wrote:You can donate a CD by Nirvana to me, and in so doing you transfer your license to listen to that music to me along with the disc.

What I meant is exactly that. I donate the CD to you, but the content remains copyrighted, if I donated or not.

So, in case of XDP/PSD which are based of donated content:

PlanetWeb 2.6, which was freely available

So they are donated to me, but the content is still copyrighted: I cannot make any money with it. But I can donate a copy to my brother and my friends.

OneThirty8 · Post by **OneThirty8** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:54 pm

Christuserloeser wrote:
OneThirty8 wrote:You can donate a CD by Nirvana to me, and in so doing you transfer your license to listen to that music to me along with the disc.
What I meant is exactly that. I donate the CD to you, but the content remains copyrighted, if I donated or not.

So, in case of XDP/PSD which are based of donated content:

PlanetWeb 2.6, which was freely available
So they are donated to me, but the content is still copyrighted: I cannot make any money with it. But I can donate a copy to my brother and my friends.

No, it means that you are allowed to give away your one and only copy and retain no right to use it yourself. Cost/profit is not the issue. The right of the copyright holder to decide how and under what conditions the work is to be distributed is the issue. The browsers were given away under certain conditions, and if Sega and the companies they licensed technologies from are not willing to grant another entity the right to distribute those works, then you're technically violating copyright by distributing those works.