On 5/1/2012 6:02 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
On 5/1/12 2:51 PM, "Justin Mclean"<jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
Hi,
Perhaps we can consider this as a fallback?
I was just look at this thread on the Adobe forums [1] where the same issue
come up before (for creating a Fedora package for the OS Adobe SDK) and it's
suggests that it may be possible to create our own dummy swc using code like
so:
If we have to, I will ask about it, but to me, it violates the reverse
engineering clause in the license, and potentially, the copyright as well,
but I am not a lawyer.
I am not a lawyer either, but I've been known to play on the Internet
and such topics catch my interest at times; so this is my ramble on such
things.
I, personally, feel that it wouldn't violate the reverse engineer
clause because all this stuff is already well documented publicly. We
wouldn't be reverse engineering anything; just creating our own thing to
the own API.
It shouldn't violate copyright; because we are writing our own code
from scratch. Unless Adobe wants to claim copyright on the API which is
possible. I know I read about a API related lawsuit at one point, but I
have no idea what the results were.
However, this is all very tricky as we live in a lawsuit happy world;
and it makes sense to follow Adobe's guidance on such issues; as I doubt
we could win against them (from a funding perspective) and any related
wranglings would effectively stunt the project.
The first lawyer I hired offered to "send a letter claiming X, Y, and
Z" even though there was no legal truth to X, Y, or Z. This was under
the assumption that the people said letter was being sent to
wouldn't/couldn't hire a lawyer to tell them "this is all a lie." The
same concept is used a lot these days w/ "Pre settlement Letters".
