Ask HN: Fable hacked my piano, can I release the results?
I have a self-playing piano using a system called PianoDisc Protigy. They sell music files encoded in MP3s with MIDI data in the right channel. I bought a piece by Erik Satie and, out of curiosity, used AI tools like Astra and Fable to analyze and recreate the file. Fable decoded the format, identified obfuscation (decoy notes) that PianoDisc adds, and built both an encoder and a decoder. I'm wondering if I'm legally allowed to publish the decoder or encoder.
You are free to interpret this comment as prohibition or as my blessing, but... If it matters, ask your lawyer. If it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter. Or to put it another way, trademarks (you've mentioned two) and copyrights (it's a crapshoot) are complex. And in some jurisdictions (notably the US) anybody can sue anyone for anything. Your risk aversion is yours, not someone else's. Your financial and legal wherewithal is likewise yours.
IANAL, but it might be relevant to others trying to answer what jurisdiction you are in. (US, EU, CN, JP, elsewhere?) Also, when you bought from PianoDisc, did you agree to abide by a certain jurisdiction's laws in your use of PianoDisc? And did you explicitly agree to not share any sort of decoder/encoder in any ToS?
IANAL. But I think reverse engineering their data structure, identifying a security measure - even one as weak as obfuscation, and publishing code to circumvent it is clearly against your license.
They might object to the existence of the software and demand “its destruction.” Or sue your ass…or file a DCMA takedown with Github. Or all of the above. The best likely outcome is probably “no.” Because they have lawyers and that’s what lawyers do. If you really really want to share the information, you might write a blog post with technical details without linking to any code. Sharing the blog to the “Facebook group” will let you assess community and corporate interest and make an informed decision. Keep in mind that they could say yes and still do all that bad stuff anyway.
- Giefo6ah
If you live in the USA, the "decoy notes" may be considered an "effective technical measure" from the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act".
If you live in Europe, this restriction may be considered "gatekeeping" and exempted by the Digital Markets Act.
Don't bring attention to yourself by asking for permission. Publish your codec, and if the company cares about this they will send a cease and desist.
If you want the world to benefit from your code but you don't want to be responsible for it, try to adapt the codec to ffmpeg. The ffmpeg project is used to dealing with these matters, and will keep your codec working for eternity.
- arjie
The nature of these tools is that your post and the device should suffice to replicate so in some sense you have already published the encoder and the decoder.
- brudgers
You are free to interpret this comment as prohibition or as my blessing, but...
If it matters, ask your lawyer.
If it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter.
Or to put it another way, trademarks (you've mentioned two) and copyrights (it's a crapshoot) are complex. And in some jurisdictions (notably the US) anybody can sue anyone for anything.
Your risk aversion is yours, not someone else's. Your financial and legal wherewithal is likewise yours.