RE: What Happened

[David Eckert]

Allow me to just put it this way, reverse engineering IS illegal,
HOWEVER even Microsoft reverse-engingeers stuff that they want to know
how it works and to write drivers/etc for, so I still don't see the
point of why anyone would have a problem, it's not like ReactOS is the
first to utilize reverse-engineering practices to learn something, and
secondly I'd like to point out by the information I have studied,
ReactOS DOESN'T have Windows source code in it (at least by the
current facts, no) it was suspected that so due to a certain crash
that looked similar in terms of debugging very identicle to Windows.

--
-David W. Eckert

[Michael Fritscher]

>   Allow me to just put it this way, reverse engineering
> IS illegal,
>  HOWEVER even Microsoft reverse-engingeers stuff that they want to know
>  how it works and to write drivers/etc for, so I still don't see the
>  point of why anyone would have a problem, it's not like ReactOS is the
>  first to utilize reverse-engineering practices to learn something, and
>  secondly I'd like to point out by the information I have studied,
>  ReactOS DOESN'T have Windows source code in it (at least by the
>  current facts, no) it was suspected that so due to a certain crash
>  that looked similar in terms of debugging very identicle to Windows.
>
>  --
>  -David W. Eckert
>  
If I understand correctly, reverse engineering is okay to unterstand how
something works (and "speak" each other, i.e. interoperability!), but not
copying assembler-code or a direct translation in a higher language like
C.

[Wesley Parish]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 10:42, Michael Fritscher wrote:
> >   Allow me to
> > just put it this way, reverse engineering IS illegal,
> >  HOWEVER even Microsoft reverse-engingeers stuff that they want to know
> >  how it works and to write drivers/etc for, so I still don't see the
> >  point of why anyone would have a problem, it's not like ReactOS is the
> >  first to utilize reverse-engineering practices to learn something, and
> >  secondly I'd like to point out by the information I have studied,
> >  ReactOS DOESN'T have Windows source code in it (at least by the
> >  current facts, no) it was suspected that so due to a certain crash
> >  that looked similar in terms of debugging very identicle to Windows.
> >
> >  --
> >  -David W. Eckert 
>  If I understand correctly, reverse engineering is okay to unterstand how
>  something works (and "speak" each other, i.e. interoperability!), but not
>  copying assembler-code or a direct translation in a higher language like
>  C. 
Which should be pressed more firmly on the legal eagles.  If reverse 
engineering is the scientific method applied to engineering problems, what 
distinguishes it from the scientific method?  So that the self-same means and 
methods are deemed illegal?

Or put in another context, reverse engineering is used in reconstructing an 
aviation disaster, to take one example.  Given that the internals of an 
aircraft contain some highly company-specific Intellectual Property, would 
pilots feel safer knowing their aircraft's company's precious IPR is 
protected from reverse engineering by some such law?  That if the plane 
crashes, nobody'll ever know what happened?  If Boeing or Airbus ever took 
such a ridiculous attitude, they'd be buried in their sleep by all the 
aircraft companies who haven't got such anti-safety superstitions.

Wesley Parish
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev 
-- 
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui?
You ask, what is the most important thing?
Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.

[Xavier Araque l.]

Regards: I have just stopped designing a new Wallpaper for Reacts done
alone with Free Software "Inkscape" hope that they observe it and give
him use.

http://reactosde.re.funpic.de/mediadetail.php?sec=Graphic%20arts&cat=wa…
 "ReactOS-Venezuela.jpg"

Atte: Xavier Araque "Rendergraf"
--
"HAY HOMBRES QUE LUCHAN UN DÍA Y SON BUENOS, HAY OTROS QUE LUCHAN UN
AÑO Y SON MEJORES, HAY QUIENES LUCHAN MUCHOS AÑOS Y SON MUY BUENOS,
PERO HAY LOS QUE LUCHAN TODA LA VIDA, ESOS SON LOS IMPRESCINDIBLES"
    Bertolt Brecht.
LINUX COUNTER: 292510
» DISEÑAR CADA DÍA UN MUNDO MEJOR... ESA ES NUESTRA META

[Magnus Olsen]

reverse engineering is not illegal, it is legal todo it.
But u must rember it exists diffent law in each contry about this.
Only one way todo revers eng in USA have been tested in court.
it call Clean room reverse engineering.  As long u are doing
Clean room reverse engineering it is okay. some other contry any metod are
okay to use acoding there law.

Please check u fact before u speak

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Eckert" <davy2002a(a)gmail.com>
To: <ros-dev(a)reactos.com>
Sent: den 10 February 2006 22:26
Subject: [ros-dev] RE: What Happened


>   Allow me to just put it this way, reverse engineering
> IS illegal,
>  HOWEVER even Microsoft reverse-engingeers stuff that they want to know
>  how it works and to write drivers/etc for, so I still don't see the
>  point of why anyone would have a problem, it's not like ReactOS is the
>  first to utilize reverse-engineering practices to learn something, and
>  secondly I'd like to point out by the information I have studied,
>  ReactOS DOESN'T have Windows source code in it (at least by the
>  current facts, no) it was suspected that so due to a certain crash
>  that looked similar in terms of debugging very identicle to Windows.
>
>  --
>  -David W. Eckert
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Rick Langschultz]

Here is a simple solution for this... Why not come up with a policy  
that states reverse engineering can be used only to get function  
names and inspect a functions properties and results. The reverse  
engineering can not product actual C code contributed to the project  
that is longer than 5 lines of that code. Also, any code included  
that was reverse engineered has to be accompanied by comments of how  
they obtained the code, programs used, etc...

I think there should be a coordinator that controls the flow of the  
submitted code, as well as checking to see if RE code is acceptable  
for use within ReactOS.

This would solve, or help solve, many problems that would deter  
programmers from stealing code without giving proper credit to the  
original owners.

On Feb 10, 2006, at 5:55 PM, Magnus Olsen wrote:

>   reverse engineering is not illegal, it is legal todo
> it.
>  But u must rember it exists diffent law in each contry about this.
>  Only one way todo revers eng in USA have been tested in court.
>  it call Clean room reverse engineering.  As long u are doing
>  Clean room reverse engineering it is okay. some other contry any  
>  metod are
>  okay to use acoding there law.
>
>  Please check u fact before u speak
>
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  From: "David Eckert" <davy2002a(a)gmail.com>
>  To: <ros-dev(a)reactos.com>
>  Sent: den 10 February 2006 22:26
>  Subject: [ros-dev] RE: What Happened
>
>
> >   Allow me to just put it this way, reverse
> > engineering IS illegal,
> >  HOWEVER even Microsoft reverse-engingeers stuff that they want to  
> >  know
> >  how it works and to write drivers/etc for, so I still don't see the
> >  point of why anyone would have a problem, it's not like ReactOS is  
> >  the
> >  first to utilize reverse-engineering practices to learn something,  
> >  and
> >  secondly I'd like to point out by the information I have studied,
> >  ReactOS DOESN'T have Windows source code in it (at least by the
> >  current facts, no) it was suspected that so due to a certain crash
> >  that looked similar in terms of debugging very identicle to Windows.
> >
> >  --
> >  -David W. Eckert
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Ros-dev mailing list
> >  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
> >  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev 
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Ged Murphy]

David Eckert wrote:
>   Allow me to just put it this way, reverse engineering
> IS illegal,
>     
Not in Europe it's not.

[Wesley Parish]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 10:26, David Eckert wrote:
>   Allow me to just put it this way, reverse engineering
> IS illegal, 
And Microsoft explicitly permits it in their "Inside Windows [NT | 2000 | XP]" 
books - they even allow that most prolific reverse-engineer of NT, Mark 
Russinovich, to put most of his sysinternals website on the cdrom included 
with the Microsoft Press book "Inside Windows 2000".

There's a legal doctrine called "unclean hands" - google for "define:
unclean 
hands" and you'll see that Microsoft has not a leg to stand on.  Unless the 
judges are irredeemably corrupt, which isn't impossible.

Wesley Parish
>   HOWEVER even Microsoft reverse-engingeers stuff that
> they want to know
>  how it works and to write drivers/etc for, so I still don't see the
>  point of why anyone would have a problem, it's not like ReactOS is the
>  first to utilize reverse-engineering practices to learn something, and
>  secondly I'd like to point out by the information I have studied,
>  ReactOS DOESN'T have Windows source code in it (at least by the
>  current facts, no) it was suspected that so due to a certain crash
>  that looked similar in terms of debugging very identicle to Windows.
>
>  --
>  -David W. Eckert
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev 
-- 
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui?
You ask, what is the most important thing?
Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.