Re: where did Joseph Kahan get Source code ?

Richard Cogger (
Tue, 25 Apr 1995 14:53:41 -0400

At 4:52 AM 4/25/95, Kevin Hoogheem wrote:
>>To the developers of Cu-SeeMe:
>>After reviewing the README of VideoPhone posted by Roel Vertegaal on
>>this forum, I too agree it looks like fraud. This brings to mind two
>>First, if he is not authorized to modify and distribute for profit,
>>then how did he get access to the Mac source code?
>>And second, if he IS authorized, then how did he get access to the
>>Mac source code?

No, Mr. Kahan did not have access to source code. We have informed him
that his redistribution of a modified version (by ResEdit) is in violaton
of our copyright and permission notices, and he has withdrawn it from
posting. Yes, you will be able to get access to source code in the near
future (a few weeks). What is planned is:

-------------License framework---------------

We are negotiating a Master License arrangement for commercial
distribution, but we also plan various free options. We announced this
licensing framework at our BOF at Interop recently. What we plan now is:

1. Permission to distribute the binary executable, whole and unmodified, is
included in the copyright and permissions notice in the About text and in
the documentation. We plan to edit the notices to make them clearer; note
that there are two seperate notices, the Cornell one covering CU-SeeMe and
the UIUC one refering only to the audio code supplied by Charlie Kline.

2. There will also soon be a Software Development Kit (SDK) for CU-SeeMe
PlugIn's for the Mac (a few months later for the PC). The kit will be
free, with example programs in source; PlugIn's you develop will be yours
to do with what you will. These permissions will be conveyed by copyright
and permissions notices also (no license to sign).

3. You will be able to get a free source license for internal use only with
limited internal-only experimental binary distribution and use. If you
develop something and want it generally distributed with this license, you
can give rights to us and we can, if we agree, make it part of the freely
distributed CU-SeeMe. Or you could (offer to) sell it to our Master
Licensee for commercial distribution.

4. You will also be able to get a Free Redistribution License (FRL) to
modify source and redistribute modified executables to all, for
non-commercial purposes only, if you give the mods and enhancments back to
us and our Master Licensee to do with what we will. If you have this
license, you will also be able to redistribute (modified) sources to other
holders of this same license. This license will come from our Master
Licensee who will enforce the non-commercial provisions (although the
actual sources may come from us).

5. You will also be able to obtain a royalty bearing commercial license
from our Master Licensee (look for an announcement next week) for the
Cornell sources or for sources to commercially enhanced versions; a portion
of the royalties will come back to support further work at Cornell.


>Ya know the program looks like the source code has had no changes
>to it. This looks like it was doctored up by RESedit. Look
>at the changes there all color menus moved menus more color.
>that is all more color. It does not boast a speed change or
>any other noticable differance then cuseeme does
>>I have been dying to make my own changes and play with it some.
>>I have always been under the impression from you guys that the source
>>is kept under wraps in order to prevent many 'improved' copies from
>>floating around. I would love to find an interim fix for the MediaVision
>>palette problem, even if not a proper one, it would be better than nothing.
>>Is the source available? Or did Mr. Kahan write a look-alike from scratch?
>>May WE have the source code? Pleeeeeeez ?
>>Grant Newland
>>4/24 9pm
>Kevin Hoogheem St. Mary's College of Minnesota
> P.O. Box 1137
>[NeXT] 700 Terrace Heights
>PHONE (507)457-1969 Winona, MN 55987-1399
> 70+ goon@Perilous Realms