U.S. Supreme Court decision could end reverse engineering

[beaker]

I thought reverse engineering was allready pretty much illegal with the stupid DMCA.

[MadDuke]

Just like the stupid congressmen who came up with the DMCA the Supreme Court should stay away from issues that really don't understand.

There is nothing wrong with reverse engineering because when a company does that to try to get ahead they will usually try to make their product better and in the end the consumer benefits.

Probably ever software company does this. Somebody invents a new technology and other companies try to duplicate it to stay competitive.

[BrandonD]

I think the basis of reverse engineering is still legal and makes sense. You have one party develop a spec, then pass that to another party and have them develop a product that meets that spec. That's how Compaq got started. They had someone analyze the IBM PC and come up with a spec that described it. Then that was passed to an engineering team who came up with a product based on that spec. It's like giving the engineers a target to shoot for, like giving them the "what" without the "how."

[Meaty]

but when we say "reverse engineering" are we talking about looking at a program's workflow or functionality? or are we talking about decompiling the code? Because there seems to be a fundamental difference there.

[beaker]

Reverse engineering is pretty much any method of recreating something without having the original design/plans/programming etc. Trying to make a copy without the blueprints to it. Usually by looking at it and anylizing it and figuring out how you would reproduce it without knowing how the other people did.

Decompiling would involve using the other person's code to make an exact copy which is usually considered copywrite infringement. The case in question they evaluated the product and then tried to copy the features of it in their own software.

[Meaty]

beaker, i am sorry if you answered this, i am in just disbelief.

so something like feature imitation could be branded reverse engineering?

[raz-0]

yes it could. Back in the late 80s (I think) there were some lawsuits, and basically there's look and feel type of feature implimentation. Provided you do things differently you stand a chance of getting away with it. However, if you do things the same way, you are likely headed for trouble. THe real problem is that the patent office has been handing out more and more patents for the downright obvious or practices in common use.

It's pretty bad. The laws on it in th US suck, and the patent office exacerbates it about a thousand times. I'd take a bet that even with standing case law on a look and feel type of case, you could likely wind up in court long enough to bankrupt you if not lose outright.

[Per-Anders]

so this law is to be filed under anticompetitive trust?

[parallax]

It is filed under the "we want to make even more money" bill.

Just as the DMCA was filed under the "Our company is worth more then your privacy" bill.

To bills, very much related :surprised

[PhilOsirus]

All of this is ridiculous. For exemple, Microsoft certainly had actual access and USED Netscape in order to prevent Windows users from using it properly, how would that go in court?

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.