On Sat, 2004-02-14 at 15:02, M.Hockings wrote: > I would not be so confident that the above is true. Say you were to > obtain and view the MS source code ( in fact you may not even have > looked at it but simply possess it you cannot prove that you have not > examined at all of it). Say that you then wrote and published some > piece of software, for you or your employer. If MS had the inclination > (maybe your software competes with something they are doing or wish to > do) they could examine your published product for "similarities" with > their own code and start legal proceedings if they find any. Yes, I > know that reverse-engineering is prohibited in most license agreements > but it happens anyway. Here in the USA you are innocent until proven guilty. The burden would lay with MS to _prove_ that your software violated their copyrights. Of course, the sad part of that would mean an expensive legal battle that MS could afford to out sue most other companies. Reverse engineering is not illegal in the USA. The DMCA did add extra crap to the US laws concerning reverse engineering, however it is still legal, especially for compatibility purposes. Why do you think it is OK for Open Office to work with MS Office files? How do you think we got Samba? > Don't be fooled into thinking that this does not happen, I *know* that > it does. Of course it does. That is one of the bad sides to the US legal system. A more wealthy company can intimidate a smaller company with threats of a law suit. > Mike Jim Drabb -- --------------------------------------------------------- The box said: "Requires Windows 98/2000/NT/XP or better." So, I installed LINUX! --------------------------------------------------------- James Drabb JR Senior Programmer Analyst Davenport, FL USA
