Microsoft has never sued Tridge and co. over samba which would seem to be a closer analogy - A reverse engineered network protocol, as opposed to a cracked encryption algorithm.
Mind you, I'm not a lawyer. (Mind you, I don't think anybody else who has contributed to date is either) > Yes, but it is in every aspect similar to what the person who wrote > the first letter in this thread wants to do or is advised to do, > namely to reverse-engineer the operation of a working system which is > developed only for win* and based on proprietary algorithms. That's > exactly the same what the person writing the DeCSS has done. Hence the > company creating the authentication software would probably sue the > person writing the first letter and could expect that the result would > be the same as the DeCSS lawsuit, and it is currently lost. If this > happens before the DeCSS lawsuit is finished in the Supreme Court, > then the result will be likely the same as the first stages of the > DeCSS lawsuit, meaning probably lost. > > This is only my two-pence of course, but I could not stand not to > point out the similarities between the two situation. > > Regards, > > Robert Varga > > > On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Alexander Hvostov wrote: > > > Robert, > > > > Keep in mind that case is in appeal, and is quite likely to wind up > > in the Supreme Court. It is, in every way I can imagine, a > > Constitutional case, and has every reason to be heard by the Supreme > > Court. I hope the Supreme Court Justices agree... > > > > Regards, > > > > Alex. -- Paul Haesler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
