 |
|
Intellectual Property Rights
You own the data - but will you always be able to access it?
By Joe Croser & Robert Downing, May 7, 2003
There are only two things in life said to be a certainty -
death and taxes. Why then do most of us simply assume that the
CAD data we create in applications now will be accessible by us
at any time in the future?
Autodesk has recently launched AutoCAD 2004, which has a new
file format with compression and the ability to password protect
the data inside. It is also alleged by The OpenDWG Alliance that
the 2004 files are encrypted, thus restricting the existing user
base to authorized Autodesk product use only. Naturally,
Autodesk has hotly contested these allegations, which are in
direct contradiction with the company's current marketing
message “Share with ease.” [See "Autodesk Responds to the
OpenDWG Alliance" below.]
Autodesk Responds to the
OpenDWG Alliance
To clarify its reasons
for making changes to the file format, and to elucidate the
differences between encoding and encryption, Autodesk has
issued this response:
The statement issued by the
OpenDWG Alliance contains many errors. Autodesk has not and
never has encrypted the DWG file format. The folks at
OpenDWG have just not figured out how to fully
reverse-engineer it, yet. Other companies, such as Cimmetry,
have figured out the new format, and are already shipping
new products based on it. Evan Yares of OpenDWG, in
his article, "AutoVue
Supports AutoCAD 2004," has recognized this, stating,
"Cimmetry proved me wrong."
The DWG format was changed
to benefit customers by making them more productive with
significant new AutoCAD features and functionality. The only
encryption in the AutoCAD 2004 DWG is file password
protection, which is totally under the control of the user
and is there to allow for secure transmission of drawings
solely at the user's discretion.
Autodesk does not hide that
there is some "encoding" (not "encryption") in the DWG file.
There is a big difference between the two. Encoding, when
used in a software development context, typically means
translating some concept to a digital form for use by the
computer. For example, ASCII is an encoding scheme for
English alphabet and punctuation. In ASCII, the letter "A"
is encoded as the value 65, or 1000001 binary. In fact,
ASCII stands for "American Standard Code for Information
Interchange." Thus, letters placed into this "code" are
encoded in ASCII form.
Similarly, in AutoCAD, we
have to translate things like geometry and attributes into a
digital code to be interpreted by the computer and stored on
the hard drive. DXF is one form of encoding. DWG is another.
So, the concept of a red line from 0,0 to 1,1 would be
encoded as some series of binary numbers in the DWG. This is
a common usage in software engineering. Unlike encryption,
encoding does not imply any attempt to hide or obfuscate
information.
Autodesk does respect that
our customers own their own data, and we embrace and support
open standards, such as DXF and DWF. In fact, we have
proposed an initiative to the OpenDWG group to drive
industry-wide open format, with the participation of
standards groups and leading CAD software companies, to
achieve a true CAD standard. |
From a users' perspective, how does a developer encrypting a
file format affect your future accessibility to your data? From
a legal point of view, copyright in the software (including the
algorithms for encryption and compression) is owned by the
developer. The user of the software uses it under terms of a
license. If the license to use any software terminates, the user
will no longer be entitled to run the software and therefore
will no longer be able to lawfully "open" the files he or she
created without infringing the copyright in the software. It
would be a similar case if you did not own the land in front of
your house: thus by having no rights to cross the land you would
not be able to get to your own front door!
Know your rights
So, does the CAD user have any "rights" in the CAD data
locked in the encrypted file? The answer is "yes": he or she has
copyright in the material entered, but cannot access that data
without the permission (i.e. license) of the software owner.
Unless the license makes specific mention of post-termination
rights to access the files, (which Autodesk does not) or a court
could be persuaded to imply that license, the user's data is
effectively held to ransom by the software company. If the user
didn't like the original license terms on offer (which no one
ever reads anyway) he or she shouldn't have entered into the
agreement in the first place.
So how can you increase your certainty of being able to
access your data in the future?
- Keep a paper copy of all drawings issued
- Keep an electronic copy of all drawings issued in an
independent file format such as PDF or HPGL
Both of the above will assist with access but neither really
solves the problem, as they are only useful for accessing
drawings for review or printing. They would be useless should
you wish to make changes or use the drawings as a base for
extension or decommission by the owner/operator.
Indeed, if you wish to access your data in an editable
format, thus reducing future duplication through redrawing, you
will need to start with a file format that contains editable
geometry - such as DXF. However, DXF has its own problems and
will only store geometric descriptions of data, i.e. lines, arcs
and circles. It cannot contain the "extended" data, which is
becoming more commonplace in CAD use as designers desire that
their drawings "talk" to each other and "talk" to the design
team.
Alternatives to DXF
So if DXF is not up to the task then what is? Well, a few
people got together in 1995 to launch the International Alliance
for Interoperability (IAI). Their collective aim was to specify
and develop a mechanism for transporting and translating CAD
data between applications without losing any of the extended
information associated to the geometry.
Unfortunately for consumers the IAI has been slow to gain
momentum, possibly because of its committee-like organization
and possibly because some of the larger CAD developers do not
want a tool that makes it easy for their customers to share
information with no loss of depth or intelligence. Why? Because
that may open the door for the users to look around and select
another CAD application as their editing tool of choice,
breaking the chains that tie them to any one system.
In a recent online debate between Philip G. Bernstein of
Autodesk and Keith Bentley of Bentley System1, two quite opposing
views were discussed and at some times argued. At one point,
Keith Bentley stated, “Bentley explicitly disclaims ownership of
file content." This was reinforced by Bentleys' announcement
earlier this year to open up its new DGN file format to make DGN
data accessible to any third party developers who wish to
capitalize upon it. When Bentley asked Bernstein if Autodesk’s
"encryption" of the 2004 file format suggested otherwise,
Bernstein replied, “The fact that the AutoCAD 2004 file format
is encrypted does not change the owner's right to use it." While
it may not change your rights to access the data it certainly
changes your ability to access it! I wonder if Bernstein’s
comments were an admission of encryption or a merely a slip of
the tongue under pressure? In any event the state of the 2004
DWG file remains uncertain and no independent body has proven
beyond all reasonable doubt that it is encrypted, nor has
Autodesk proven otherwise. [Editor's note: In a follow up to
this article, Autodesk did state that Bernstein was incorrect:
the files are encoded--not encrypted.]
To be able to store your data in a format with certainty of
future access, the best route forwards appears to involve
covering all of your bases by implementing an improved
multi-format archive procedure for all completed projects. And
if you wish to retain the "extended" data together with the
geometry, then perhaps the open DGN file format will prove
itself to be a slightly safer bet. At the very least as a
customer you may choose to vote with your checkbook and refuse
to upgrade to 2004 from earlier, "open" versions of AutoCAD.
About the Authors
Joe Croser is the managing partner with
CroserConsulting, a CAD
consultancy in London, and a respected industry commentator
writing regular features for the Architects Journal as well as
contributing to AEC Magazine, upFront.eZine, TenLinks and
cadgurus.com. Joe studied architecture in Oxford and has
previously worked with some key industry practices including the
Richard Rogers Partnership where he was instrumental in the
development of CAD and IT strategy for BAA's Terminal 5 and the
Millennium Dome in Greenwich.
Robert Downing is a Senior Associate in the technology group
of international law firm Dorsey & Whitney MNP <www.dorsey.com>
He acts for blue chip clients (including DaimlerChrysler and
Nike) in relation to all aspects of intellectual property rights
and has had articles published in numerous national
publications. He teaches intellectual property law at Cambridge
University."
-------------------------
1 Quotations reproduced courtesy of
Jerry Laiserin editor/publisher of The LaiserinLetter"
http://www.laiserin.com/.
Laiserin also produced and moderated the BIM Debate. For more
information visit:
http://www.laiserin.com/features/bim/index.php.
|
