Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scripsit Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > There's absolutely no point even implying that we need their permission > > to reverse engineer anything, > > If we are going to distribute code that has been derived by reverse > engineering, then we do need permission from the original copyright > holder. It's not the "reverse engineering" that needs permission; it's > the "distribute derived code".
The spec has been reverse engineered. The code is then created from the spec. That seems to break the copyright link enough. It certainly seemed to work for Compaq when they reverse engineered the PC bios. Regards, Walter Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
