Re: Fujitsu support - need help - Netcobol for windows and licensed controls.

Frederico Fonseca wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 22:04:14 +1200, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Frederico Fonseca" <real-email-in-msg-spam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:2f4q82t0n3vadc2epu2385uk4jfh52i2a4@xxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 23:26:48 -0600, Jeff Campbell <n8wxs@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Frederico Fonseca wrote:
Hi all,


I have a question that so far I have been unable to solve, and either
someone here has a solution for it, or I would like to have someone
with an active maintenance contract with them to pose this question to
them.

Situation
Power COBOL V7, 3rd party OCX control, properly licensed.

When run in test machine it gets a message box appears saying "file
License.dat is not found. License Agreement can not be completed"
If we copy the ".lic" file into the same folder as the supplied
activeX .OCX then it works fine, but this is obviously ilegal to do,
as it is basically distibuiting the development license.

The file names are different. Isn't that relevant? How does the "license.dat"
file get created? (And what does it contain?) The ".lic" file appears to be the
development license key, while the "License.dat" file seems to be the deployment
license key. Correct? My assumption would be that the install script for your
application must copy or create the "License.dat" file, at installation time,
in the same directory as the newly installed copy of the .OCX file.


It may not be as illegal as you think. The supplier may have no problem with you doing this. Talk to them.
I read the license they supply, then I spoke with them, then several
emails were exchanged with them regarding the technicalities, and ONLY
after all other venues were exhausted I did post in CLC asking for
help.


From what I have found so far it seems that FJ is not implementing the
functionality of IClassfactory2 interface which is the method many
ActiveX controls use to determine if the control is being distributed
from a legal copy of the software, and I have been unable to find a
way to "fix" this from within POWERCobol.
Jeff is correct and there is nothing Fujitsu can do about your problem. It is down to the third party supplier to provide a run time license file (or not).

This is true because the IClassFactory2 methods are implemented by the
windows COM library, not PowerCOBOL. The .OCX you are using invokes these
methods, not PowerCOBOL.
Incorrect for both Jeff and Pete.

IClassFactory is implemented within COM that part is correct, but it
is up to the container to allow for the available licensing controls
in order to allow controls to be added to it. Although the ActiveX
control does not NEED to use the IClassFactory it does need to
implement it (at least in C++). It is up to the container to see if it
is implemented and if required by the control then he (the container)
should use it.


I was incorrect above. IClassFactory and IClassFactory2 are *interfaces*
defined by COM. Their *implementations* are coded in the class object, ie,
your ActiveX component, not the COM library. The COM library will call the
implemented code when an instance of the ActiveX object is created at runtime.


The .OCX you are using may not allow 'runtime' license deployment on a
'development' licensed machine. The .OCX developer should have information
on the licensing requirements.
IClassFactory2 IS the method used to create objects that require a
license key/string to be supplied to the said object so they can
verify they are valid. Other methods include supplying a property on
the object, or supplying a ".lic" file that is only used for runtime
validation and not development.
No, it is only a CONVENTION and nobody writing COM controls HAS to implement that interface (I don't). I would contact the supplier and explain the problem. If they require validation through that interface, they should provide a method which implements it. If they don't, then it is fair to ask them how the component is to be validated at run time.

They may require you to do it directly using the COM library. Whichever way you look at it, it is hardly a Fujitsu problem.

PowerCOBOL is simply a container just like any other COM container. If you placed this component on a server side page, would you complain to Microsoft because ASP was unable to instantiate it? :-)
I didn't, but others did. And note that a component is not the same
thing as an ActiveX Control.

Fujitsu cannot possibly know how every third party supplier is going to require run time validation.(If they require it at all...)
as I said this validation is a subset of the IClassFactory (which FJ
DOES implement), and it is a subset used to validate licensing. Once
it is implemented correctly by any container, it will work with ALL
third party controls used within that container.

Not possible. I might use a trapdoor algorithm to compute a license key,
while another developer might use one or more registry values to store a
precomputed license key. Another developer might use a file 8-) to store
the key. The control's IClassFactory2 code would have to be implementation
unique to handle these and any other possible license methods. No two
controls will necessarily do it the *same* way.


(In my experience many suppliers don't require it, and there is nothing to stop anyone re-usng their component once it is registered on a client system. (Of course, the majority of clients are not developers and probably don't have an Object Browser readily available to find out the methods and properties...). Also, most clients would not even be aware the component was there once they had installed the application.)
My experience (although not with FJ COBOL) is MANY suppliers do
require a runtime license, and most of them do implement it using only
the mentioned class. The fact that most "clients" do not notice that
they have available a illegal license of a piece of software will not
prevent BSA (or whatever similar legal entities available on your
country) from processing your company should it be found in 100 of
your computers, as supplying the ".lic" without proper authorization
would amount to piracy.

I honestly believe your best option here is to communicate with the supplier.

Pete.

Not really. Best option would be for FJ to have this implemented
(which it seems they have not), and the second one would be for
someone that has gone through this problem to post the solution here
or by private email.
Note that I may now have found a solution but will not be testing this
until tomorrow (1 AM now, bed time).

If I am correct I will be happy to share the solution with anyone that
needs it.

And for clarification , V8 also has the same problem (just tried it).

So, it's not PowerCOBOL related. 8-) 8-)



Regards

Frederico Fonseca


Frederico Fonseca
ema il: frederico_fonseca at syssoft-int.com

Jeff Campbell
n8wxs@xxxxxxxx

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Alternate "container" style
    ... "container" that allows each column to sized independently. ... suggest the general method and types of controls used to achieve that kind ... Several apps I've produced over the last few years incorporate a ... license, you're free to copy/adapt their code. ...
    (comp.os.os2.programmer.misc)
  • Re: Control problem
    ... After reading your post I checked all my controls. ... that my user controls had a constituent control that required a license key. ... > Does your control use any constituent controls that require a license key ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.controls)
  • Re: Active X Control license issues
    ... Are you sure Binary Compatibility is set on that "problem" control? ... since I've looked at license keys but iirc, they're based on the control's GUID ... > I have generated all the licenses for my controls and entered them into database. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.controls)
  • Re: Licence needed for VB.NEt Resource Kit
    ... > it for free to be put in shackles for sharing ... fwiw, I got that kit long before even considering the chore of loading .Net ... probably the best set of AX controls out there. ... someone simply shares their license with you (besides the fact that it's ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.windowsforms.controls)
  • Re: External Connector License
    ... The license only allows for you to properly pay for those users. ... application that controls security. ... > internal security as well). ...
    (microsoft.public.sharepoint.windowsservices)