From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S271032AbTGVUA7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2003 16:00:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S271034AbTGVUAd (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2003 16:00:33 -0400 Received: from mcgroarty.net ([64.81.147.195]:29866 "EHLO pinkbits.internal") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S271032AbTGVUAc (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2003 16:00:32 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 15:15:17 -0500 To: Jamie Lokier Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: BK Licence: Protocols and Research Message-ID: <20030722201517.GA25774@mcgroarty.net> References: <20030717120505.GA22304@zion.nuigalway.ie> <20030717145802.GC24697@work.bitmover.com> <20030722165615.GA3267@mail.jlokier.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030722165615.GA3267@mail.jlokier.co.uk> X-Debian-GNU-Linux: Rocks From: Brian McGroarty Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 05:56:15PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Larry McVoy wrote: > > If you managed to stay close then we'd put digital signatures > > into the protocol to prevent your clone from interoperating with BK. > > If this hypothetical scenario were to occur, I believe that reverse > engineering specific parts of the software, for the specific purpose > of getting the signature key, in order to use it specifically for > interoperating with the software, would be allowed regardless of > license here in Europe, and perhaps in the USA too. Well off topic here, but in the US at least, the DMCA makes this hands-off if these features are added under the auspices of security or server license protection. This is part of the reason for certain monopolists adding "security features" to their newer file formats.