| ??? 09/25/06 22:01 Read: times |
#125042 - I'll make it clear Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
I'm sure that if you ask enough people, you'll hear about reasons d) through z) and then some, all of them valid.
valid is one thing, some may argue that "I want to see which algorithm my competitor has come up with to make his product so much better" is valid. By valid I mean both legal and ethical. If someone's purpose is not legal and ethical, then IMHO it's not valid. I pointed out a specific case in which my use of the disassembler was both legal and ethical. I'm well aware that some others will misuse such tools, but that's the price we pay for freedom. You are pointing out cases where clearly the use of a disassembler would not be ethical, and maybe not legal. I don't disagree with you in that regard. But I do maintain that there are valid (see above) reasons for using one. The issue here is that a patent should not be required to copyright material, by the very name a copyright should suffice. May it be marginally legal? possibly but ethical? NEVER!!! IMHO, and that of many others, software patents are not ethical and should be illegal. But that's getting off on a tangent. I'll just say that I do not accept the validity of any software patents at all. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| D52 disassembler update | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| what's the fascination with disassemblers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Reverse Engineering | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I call it | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Legitimate Reverse Engineering | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| OK, you got c) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Other side of the coin | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Other side | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Technique | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Modifying the code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| valid vs legal | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'll make it clear | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
ethics? | 01/01/70 00:00 |