Frogboy Frogboy

TGT Soft sues Stardock (just in time for the holidays :( )

TGT Soft sues Stardock (just in time for the holidays :( )

Well it looks like the folks at TGT Soft are in the holiday spirit (not!).  On Wednesday Stardock received a lawsuit from TGT Soft that was filed in .

The lawsuit essentially asks for a declaration that TGT Soft can use Stardock’s IconPackager theme format without liability. 

This incident began last month with the first beta of Style XP 2.0 which had a button labeled “Add an Icon Pack” which when pressed opened a dialog in which they could load a .iptheme or .ip file (IconPackager files). We were fairly annoyed that 1) They would try to compete with IconPackager/Object Desktop by using IconPackager files (remember, they sell this thing), 2) That they didn’t even give us credit for our icon packaging format but instead referred to them as “icon packs” as if .ipthemes were some generic term created by the ASCII group or something and 3) They didn’t even create icon packages but rather planned to just exploit the popularity of IconPackager which we’ve worked hard and long on for many years to make popular.

We informed them that this was unacceptable and we would defend our rights either technically or legally if necessary. If they want to compete with Object Desktop or IconPackager they would need to come up with their own format that they have to support and promote.  If they want to put out an icon changing program, that’s fine. But to copy our format and use it so that they can undercut the price of our software is unacceptable and we believe, illegal. 

In subsequent correspondence, we even offered to license them the use of our format for a modest royalty (remember, this isn’t a freeware program we’re talking about, they’re selling Style XP for $20 a pop). Their response was to reject that and file a lawsuit that seems to be designed to force us to let them use/convert our IconPackager theme format without any compensation. 

Apparently they would have it where we would be the ones to provide the software to create and support icon packages (which is where most of the development/marketing costs have come from) and they would just reap the benefits financially. Note that Style XP 2.0 currently does not seem to have the ability to actually create icon packages/sets. Only apply them.

They have subsequently come up with their own format (.iconset) but since they can’t actually create .iconset files from their program, they rely on a new program they’ve made, IconTranslate, which seems to exist primarily to convert IconPackager themes to their “.IconSet” format. And once installed turns on a feature in Style XP to read IconPackager themes directly from within their program.

Picture this scenario then: Someone buys Style XP instead of IconPackager or Object Desktop costing us income. Then their customers would come to WinCustomize.com to download icon packages to use with their program, costing us more money since we pay for the bandwidth.  We pay the costs, they make the money, and to top it off, they’re suing us, costing us legal expenses.

To us, this situation is akin to someone asking a skinner to let them port their skin to a different platform and if the skinner says no then turning around and suing them to try to force the skinner to let them port their skin. Stardock fully intends to defend its intellectual property rights.  The implications if TGT Soft were to win are far reaching not just to Stardock but intellectual property holders everywhere including skin and theme authors.

We generally feel that people who create stuff should have a say over how that stuff is used. Stardock worked long and hard to make IconPackager a success. Its popularity is not due to marketing but due to the hard work over a long period of time (ex: making it possible to create and apply icons on Windows 95, Windows 95 + IE4, Windows 98, Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP).  Doing that was not easy as early IconPackager users can attest to. It was very hard to make IconPackager work reliably on the many different versions of Windows, different interactions with the OS and Internet Explorer, etc. But this was part of the effort necessary to make IconPackager successful and why it’s the most popular, by far, icon packaging technology available.  On top of that, Stardock has paid many thousands of dollars over the years to create icon packages to help promote our program and format (such as the recently released Christmas Time IconPackager theme).

 

For someone to simply come along and try to cash in on our hard work without any compensation strikes us as both morally and legally wrong.  But to actually sue us (and they are also suing me personally, not just Stardock and I can say, on a personal note, getting a lawsuit that targets me personally a week before Christmas is pretty crummy) is just incredible.

Like I said, we don’t have a problem with them changing icons or making icon sets. What features they add to their program are their business. But to try to profit from our hard work over many years is wrong and to file a lawsuit against us (and me personally) to try to force us to let them use our intellectual property goes beyond words.

So that’s where we’re at.  We will defend our rights because the implications it would have on all our software as well as on the community. If people who create things don’t get to have a say on how it’s used, it would likely have a chilling effect on our community – whether you’re a skin author, an icon artist, a theme author, or a software developer.

 

IconPackager’s page is: https://www.stardock.com/products/iconpackager/

68,983 views 281 replies
Reply #26 Top
I think I'll sue MS. They won't allow me to rename XP, and sell it as my own OS.... ..... grrrrr



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #27 Top
It's on the news at NEOWIN - if anyone is interested http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?category=main&id=16074#comment170732
Reply #28 Top
They haven't a leg to stand on Brad, so don't concern yourself with the non-possibility of losing. They're simply trying to get back at you guys for maintaining your lead in the Windows-skinning arena after all this time.

As has been said plenty of times already, for a company who essentially sell an illegal hack to come out and claim that they're somehow better morally than you is just insane. My only advice to you would be to stick close to your friends at Microsoft and try not to say too much in the public arena about the case. You have to know that you're in the right here, so just hold on to that thought and see this thing through. Any costs you incur will eventually be payed by TGT Soft anyway.

In the meantime, know that you have the full support of the skinning community here at WinCustomize, and without you and your products we wouldn't even be here today. TGT Soft owe you a debt of gratitude for building the potential for their 'business', and they should just be ashamed for resorting to petty bullying tactics.

Have a good Christmas mate, and look forward to the year that TGT Soft and their commerical hacks finally dig their own grave.
Reply #29 Top
Well said, Grayhaze !



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #30 Top
/me seconds that...

Have a wonderful holiday season Stardock, and everyone here at WC as well. Fear not --- They've done this to themselves.
[Message Edited]
[Message Edited]
Reply #31 Top
I think i have still got my membership to the ThemeXP site which gives me access to the messageboards

Oh no Leo....no we are not going there.....behave....down Tiger......

Leo - Lets show the skinning world that we are mature and not resort to stupidity like that thank you very much

Leo super glues his fingers to the desk
[Message Edited]
[Message Edited]
Reply #32 Top
Made me laugh all the time

TGT, are you all mad ?
Reply #33 Top
http://www.tgtsoft.com/faq.php

Q: What Icon Sets does Style XP support?
A: StyleXP 2.0 only support the new .iconset and .iconzip file format. However, a free and separate download is available called IconTranslate. This will translate from Stardock's .ip and .iptheme file format as well as Bee Icon's .bit format. We may add more icon set support if there is another file format you would like to see converted.

Blatantly stated that they rip Stardock. Morons > They acutally have the nerve to say that they are THE company to start the customization craze of windows xp. I wish them well in their new endeavor of unemployment



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #34 Top
Hehe that's funny...

Stardock's been making WindowBlinds since...'98? '99? Well before XP was a glimmer in Bill Gates' eye. I think it goes to show that imitation is the best form of flattery. And I just bet that Mr. Gates HAS a ODNT subscription and that he DOES read the messageboards here...and that he's been chomping at the bit to put "the touch" on TGT for ripping the .msstyles format and the UXTHEME.dll to shreads. Sure, we've seen a lot of cool stuff from it (thin taskbars, compact startmenus, etc) but the fact remains that it's all based upon a hacked system file -- something Big M does NOT like, I'm sure. So Mr. Gates is probably laughing his billionaire keister off seeing this, because he KNOWS that TGT don't have a snowball's chance in hades of making this whole farce work. Fact, he's probably already called Brad and made arrangements for TGT's funeral...
Reply #35 Top
Hey...I found the answer to my question....now that's how they can survive all these times
Reply #36 Top
bill gates reading this...

I wouldn't worry, your in the right and tgtsoft is in the wrong, unless your worried about louisiana state laws (there worse then the ones in tennessee)

I also wouldn't be suprised if microsoft sues tgt, finally
Reply #37 Top
Lawyers...Hang them all!

I live in Illinois which is rated as the worst/best State for litigation and settlements, depending on which side you're on. So much so, that the medical profession is abandoning Illinois due to the impossible highy prohibitive cost of liability insurance.

I just looked in our new phone book today, and there is a special section devoted to "Lawyers", 40 pages.

This TGT lawsuit is just another example of how "Lawyers" have made a mockery of our Legal System, and goes to show all of us, that soon, no one will be safe from their GREED. >


Powered by SkinBrowser!
[Message Edited]
Reply #38 Top
Those TGT Soft bastards! Nothing wrong with developing a similar competing product, but to steal a Stardock format then sue Stardock for not letting them use it is just wrong. It is companies like TGT Soft and SCO that make me sick.



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #40 Top
Absolutely pathetic....as if their "skinning program" isn't sad enough already. >
Reply #41 Top
I'm thinking TGT Soft sees the writing on the wall, ie: their product/hack being made useless upon the release of Longhorn.
What is one alternative?
Gradually change the software they sell to become a program that essentially just applies other skins. Starting with IconPackager and moving through the line to WindowBlinds. They won't be able to use msstyles anymore, so if they intend to stay in the desktop customization business, it's either come up with a new hack or find a way to use other companies skins.
First step down that road?



Powered by SkinBrowser!
Reply #42 Top
I just have to ask, how do you Icon makers feel about this?  I mean, if I made an icon to be used with a certain app and uploaded it to a site for that app then I saw somebody else using it for a different app....I'm not sure how I would feel about it.  It just seems wrong.  It seems like they are really ripping the icon artists.  Are they going to go to all the artists and ask permission?  I somehow doubt it....
Reply #43 Top
hmmm... are they total morons or what?!?!

/me rounds up the possé and heads for Style XP HQ

Anyone got some spare tar and a bag of feathers??
Reply #44 Top

On my Architectural drawings....

"This drawing is the property of Paul Martin and shall not be used or communicated in any way without prior written permission."

This makes ALL copies/variations/permutations of my copyrighted property unlawful unless specific consent is given.

I currently have floored a claim from a builder that is attempting to prevent construction of a project which made use of drawings prepared by him.  The 'boo-boo' on his part is that his drawings had used mine without MY consent....invalidating any claim he may have to 'his' works....

Now, if an Icon artist compiles his works for distribution with Iconpackager there is no consideration or provision in the implicit distribution consent for this 'package' to be reverse-engineered in some form for some alternate distribution means.

This is therefore an infringement of the artists' expressed and/or inherent property rights.

Each artist would have a far better chance for a successful suit against TGTSoft than the latter would against Stardock.

If this distribution via alternate format eventuates I wonder whether the clever people at TGTSoft will welcome a sea of individual suits asserting breach of copyright.

If that happens, don't forget to sue TGTSoft in whole and individually...

 

Now what pisses me off is not the 'attack' on Stardock and Brad as such [frivolous litigation is uniquely American] although it's both untimely, unwarranted and indefensible, but the fact that a 'part' of the Skinning world can be willing to drag the whole industry into disrepute....this is the sort of crap that happens in other walks of life....we don't need it in ours.

I am betting the writing is on the wall for TGTSoft's dll hack, etc, which keeps getting nobbled with each Service Pack release and likely will never work on Longhorn.....they'll be needing to diversify, hence this Icon Packager theft issue. [sorry....'alleged theft' issue]...

The last unsavoury event of significance was the unfortunate association of the original skinz.org with eFront...but even that was an 'outsider' to the community.

Like it or not, TGTSoft is 'part' of skinning.....unfortunately not a particularly 'nice' part, as current events clearly demonstrate.  Their clear willingness to ride rough-shod over property rights and bring disharmony to the skinning community are damning to their cause.

May their chickens turn to emus and kick their dunny down...

Reply #45 Top
um, this is dumb... there are no legal grounds... its like suing ford to use their body from the new ford GT...

never gonna happen...
Reply #46 Top
Hello! Reverse engineering a proprietary format. Isn't this against the DMCA here in the USA? That Intellectual Property that they are stealing there.

Reply #47 Top

Well, to answer your question, Karma, normally I wouldn't care wghat program people use to use icons/skins I would make. I would care though if my icons/skins were distributed without my consent, but as far as my work is downloaded from where I made them available, I really would not care what use they personnaly make of it - again, as long as they don't distribute it.  For example, if somebody unzips an iconpackage I made and decides to apply them individually without IP, or if a Mac user decided to convert it in Mac format, or if somebody used any program really I would not care. I don't make things specifically for an application, but for people to use. It just so happens that the easiest way to use icons at the present is to use Icon Packager, but it's not something I would or wish to force on people.

On the other hand, TGT Soft having proved to the face of the World that they are really just a bunch of sharks, I would wholeheartedly support Stardock at the persent.  I would therefore wish that anything I made would not in any way be used in conjunction with any product made by TGT Soft. Again, I emphasis that it's not because I would feel ripped or deceived in any way - but solely as to show my support for Stardock in this issue.

Reply #48 Top
Oh man. Like others said, it's a nice 'gift'.

Hacked DLL, ripped iconpackager, and now what? TGT is in trouble indeed.
Reply #49 Top
Reverse engineering


It states on their website that this is one of the services they offer >
Reply #50 Top
Actually, there's nothing illegal, per se, in reverse engineering, nor should there be (even the DMCA, as bad as it is, allows reverse engineering for compatiblity and interoperability purposes).

The problem lies in how the reverse engineering is done (i.e., clean room vs copy and paste).

That said, what TGTSoft is trying to do is to use a copyrighted format without permission. They're on pretty shaky legal ground there.