Re: How can I get the source code?
Re: How can I get the source code?
- Subject: Re: How can I get the source code?
- From: Ryan Ramsey <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 15:32:00 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I'm going to agree with Joseph on this one. While I do believe there
are many instances where reverse engineering is useful, I don't think
this is one of those cases. If you were trying to clone a proprietary
protocol maybe, but I don't think that decompiling an OpenGL based
program is practical for any purpose. If you want to learn how
programs work, there are plenty out there where the source is available
WITH COMMENTS and DOCUMENTATION! Leave the decompiling for the
virus/trojan crowd.
Ryan
On Jul 23, 2004, at 3:34 PM, Joseph Feld wrote:
Without taking a position on the correctness of the bitlaw position, I
think
that defending this position in court is probably far more trouble
then the
original poster was looking for.
That being the case, in the context of the original post (student
looking to
inspect the source code of a game for educational purposes) I stand by
my
advice that it's not worth it to risk costly litigation by decompiling
a
copyrighted work when there are countless open source works available
that
can accomplish the same end.
on 7/23/04 4:03 PM, Tommy Knowlton at email@hidden wrote:
<quote href="http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/fair_use.html";>
In the context of computer technologies, the fair use doctrine is
often
used in the context of reverse engineering. Under trade secret
principles, it is generally accepted to "reverse engineer" a product
to
determine how the product works. Reverse engineering may involve
analyzing circuit board layouts, "peeling" back a integrated circuit
chip, or decompiling computer software. However, it is impossible to
decompile software and then analyze the results without making a copy
(or a derivative work) of the software. Courts have sometimes held
that
the making of these copies in the context of reverse engineering is a
fair use and is not copyright infringement.
</quote>
Now, I realize that bitlaw is not a definitive opinion, and IANAL. But
I felt compelled to respond to the corporate-sponsored legal opinion
George offered.
I hope George will take no offense.
--
Tommy
_______________________________________________
xcode-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/xcode-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
--
Joseph Feld
email@hidden
"Generic, profound sounding quote from some semi-obscure artist or
philosopher, intended to make me seem deep because I know of it, but
really
giving the appearance of some trite 2nd year English major" (above
mentioned
semi obscure artist or philosopher)
_______________________________________________
xcode-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/xcode-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFBAsdYYsi7F8XgsfURAhRdAJ9Sg37PEM4mB1bcv2ige7z9o9lUEQCcDs0U
+KAN3qt6EcYTzp1lI7kl4LM=
=4R89
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
xcode-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/xcode-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.