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 Louisiana.
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.
View: Full Story
News source: Wincustomize
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.
View: Full Story News source: Wincustomize
To prove my point, take any .iptheme and rename it to .zip and open it with WinZip, etc. - walla! It's a ZIP file, and nothing more!
That's not correct. .iptheme files are text files with very specific content. .IP files are zip files renamed.
Version 3.0.8 (November 8, 2003)
* Supporting of *.ip and *.iptheme formats was removed
I think Bee is in Russia or something so it wouldn't be easy for him to do that. I don't know what we're going to do yet. It's in the hands of the lawyers at this point.
Obviously we have to protect our intellectual property though. Whether people like/dislike Stardock or not doesn't matter, I think it would be very bad for not just us but skinners in general if the people who create this stuff don't have control over how it's used.
Imagine if someone asked a skinner if he could port his skin to aother program. And the author declined. What would be the result if the guy instead decided to just rip the skin anyway and then sue the skin author to force him to give permission?
From our pov, that's basically what's happening here.
dracken, yo dont get out much do you? People charge for things in life. People buy them if they are good.
get real.
Still doesn't deter from the fact that you accuse me of not attributing material correctly when the story says "Full Story" with a link, and where it says "News source". If it's written by one of our staff it says "In-House", but it doesn't say that.
Hopefully you'll learn to read correctly in the future, we'll all be happy when you finally do.
You can't make a freeware program either, unless its hacks because Microsoft is only giving Stardock access.
That is complete nonsense. There is no such thing as "exclusive" APIs. Stardock has no advantages over any other ISV in this regard.
Then they would have a legitimate competitor, their own format, and helped the community.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.