<div>US copyright law does not ignore the need for reverse engineering in these circumstances (i.e., for compatibility purposes)...</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Title 17, Section 1201 of the US code says, in part ..</div>
<p><em>(f) Reverse Engineering. ... a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.
</em></p>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"></font>...<br> </div>
<div>Heavy on legalese, but you get the idea.</div>
<div><br> </div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/3/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">FGM</b> <<a href="mailto:fgm@osinet.fr">fgm@osinet.fr</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">One thing you need to keep in mind is the explicit allowance of reverse<br>engineering by law within the EU member states, transposing an EU directive,
<br>which AFAIK does not an equivalent in the USA, where reverse engineering can<br>land you in deep trouble.<br><br>The case you mention could fall under this legal situation.<br><br>----- Original Message -----<br>From: <
<a href="mailto:ttw+drupal@cobbled.net">ttw+drupal@cobbled.net</a>><br>To: <<a href="mailto:development@drupal.org">development@drupal.org</a>><br>Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 1:05 PM<br>Subject: Re: [development] Modules that integrate non-GPL PHP apps
<br>violatethe GPL.<br><br><br>> On 02.09-15:47, Jeff Eaton wrote:<br>> [ ... ]<br>> what still confuses me, however, is that i recall a law suit with one<br>> of the larger software companies about 10 years ago where they sued
<br>> a smaller company for reverse engineering their code to write compatible<br>> software. the case was lost (as i recall) on the basis that once you<br>> had purchased something you were entitled to use it to access your
<br>> data (which you still had ownership over) in whatever manner you chose<br>> (including reverse engineering and interfacing with those components<br>> to better access your information). [...]<br><br></blockquote>
</div><br>