On Sunday 03 November 2002 10:50 pm, Gavriel State wrote:
Mark Hannessen wrote:
When the patch was published, there was a discussion, and the conclusion was that the code is very probably legal, and is not against DMCA
Are you sure about the above statements? Have you checked that, or it is just your opinion?
Carlos words regarding copy protection:
You aren't giving hints to decrypt some code, simply implementing the win32 API, and sometimes implementing a PC architecture, it is far away of decrypt code ;).
Laurent's copy protection patch, while impressive, does have a pretty serious copyright-related issue, which has nothing to do with the DMCA. The problem is that his SafeDisc driver is - at least in parts
- a direct translation of a dissassembly. Such translation means
that technically it's a derivative work, and thus would require the agreement of the original copyright owner to redistribute.
-Gav
hmm.... that's too bad. couldn't this problem be eliminated by creating a safedisc "spec" from this patch, and doing a dirty-room/clean-room number on it, by implementing that "spec" from scratch? Dunno if it's worth the effort... are a lot of people really in need of safedisc support?