[comp.org.eff.talk] Do *NOT* reveal or mention "hacking" information

llama@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Joe Francis) (11/16/90)

Steve Groom writes:
<As for the *illegality* of such a violation of license, I don't know.
<"Trade Secrets" are another issue altogether.  The consequences
<are unclear, but what is clear is that just because you purchased
<the latest-and-greatest from XYZ software you don't necessarily
<have the right to do what you want with it or to it.

<Read the license.  There's a reason they make you open the triple-sealed
<packages to get to the diskettes.  If you don't like the license don't
<use the software.
--

I am not a lawyer, and the following is my understanding of US law only:

It is impossible for someone not privy to trade secret information to 
violate trade secrets.  Reverse engineering a trade secret and then using
it is not a violation of trade secret law.  It may violate copyright
or patent law if you go on to use the code in some form, but it will 
not be a violation of trade secret.

As for me not owning the disks.  That's hooey.  Software companies would
like you to think that, but it I last I heard it's "court worthiness"
was very much an open question.

As always, these are my less than perfectly formed opinions.  Corrections
are welcome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Read My Lips: No Nude Texans!" - George Bush clearing up a misunderstanding