Wrong, that is incorrect. My ex-partner cooked the books and my current partner designed and engineered virtually everything, from day one.
But wait a minute, aren’t you the guy, maybe with a friend or two, that took our software, decompiled it, and then packaged it into something with another name.
I’ve seen the source of BoardCad, you guys were so lazy that after taking our code, you didn’t even change the names of the methods. There are unique things that we named that are currently in BoardCad. BoardCad looks very similar to Aku Shaper (APS3000), the feature Ghost Board is a good example.
If you have proof that your ex-partner cooked the books and you didn’t get what was rightfully yours, why don’t you sue him? The IRS would probably be very interested too…
I still have a hard time understanding that if you work for a guy designing a machine, you own the design. There has to be very peculiar contact in this case or the business laws in Australia must be very different from here, because here consultants or employees does not own the right to the products they develop, in full or partly. I don’t think that’s normal anywhere else either unless it is explicitly expressed in the contract. It’s certainly not the way it is with my current employer which is an US based company.
The only thing that is the same in BoardCAD and AkuShaper is the encryption key. You know it and I know it. It was the only way I could keep improving the code I wrote for printing templates that was incorporated in APS3000/AkuShaper as suddenly I could no longer open my .brd files, that situation was certainly an inspiration. Everything else in BoardCAD is written from scratch though there are a few textbook examples incorporated in the code. The AkuShaper and BoardCAD doesn’t even use any of the same extension libraries. But please prove me wrong. You know where to find the code.
With the logic you’re using then you must have reverse engineered Shape3D since your program have similar features as Shape3D. You and I know that isn’t true. Miki have been involved in both those projects and it shows. We’ve had the pleasure to be able to use ideas from both those programs (and others) to our liking, so the programs end up similar much in the same way as OpenOffice is similar to Microsoft Office. If we’re guilty of stealing something, we’re guilty of stealing ideas. But I’m guessing most of those ideas wasn’t yours in the first place.
The major difference between my ethics and your ethics is that I get no money out of this. 'Nuff said.
regards,
Håvard