Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Reverse Engineering (Was Re: block copy & VAX MOVC)
Summary: Disassembly is not equivalent to reverse engineering.
Keywords: copyright
Message-ID: <1749@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 10 Oct 88 14:19:27 GMT
References: <2220003@hpausla.HP.COM> <46500026@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <376@wucs1.wustl.edu>
Organization: SCADA
Lines: 14

In article <376@wucs1.wustl.edu>, jps@wucs1.wustl.edu (James Sterbenz) writes:
> I don't know all the precise legal details, but as I remember, an
> OCO license has a clause prohibiting disassembly of code, i.e.
> reverse engineering.

Reverse engineering is taking a product and figuring out how to make it.

This does not imply that you're disassembling the code. You could just be
running it and observing how it behaves. It's amazing how much you can tell
about a system this way. I have diagnosed bugs in people's code this way,
and they've been sure I was looking at the source.
-- 
Peter da Silva  `-_-'  Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
"Have you hugged  U  your wolf today?"            peter@ficc.uu.net