Re: Reverse engineering != piracy (was Re: RosAsm disassembler output vs. IDA Pro)

From: Betov (betov_at_free.fr)
Date: 01/28/04 

Date: 27 Jan 2004 23:30:11 GMT

Gerhard W. Gruber <sparhawk@gmx.at> écrivait
news:dpdd10lue2kugr4oosig8r6thdsb1ensvi@4ax.com:

> Claiming you write a disassembler for librarylinking to
> cover for piracy is IMO quite a stupid explanation. So either Rene is
> very clever because he really intends piracy and using this argument
> because others might consider it so unbelievable that they will think
> it is true, or he is very stupid to openly advance piracy directly,
> because then he will get into big trouble.
>

I have always said that the first purpose of this
Tool is for _Translation_. In that area, Assembly
Language has a _huge_ advantage on all other ones:

Assembly is the universal nodal of all languages.

So, facing the lack of Asm Demos and the pain the
guys wanting to switch to Asm may have with not
recovering their previous works, all i can say is
that i am rather estonished, that nobody did it
before.

Now, i am bit bored of this demential discussion,
about the legal aspects, suggested by fucky ones
like Hutch and master Pdf, and i will no more
spoil my time with discussing of such a stupidity.

[Please, Gerhard, there are other interresting
things to discuss about, without falling into
Master Pdf usual Tips&Tricks&Traps... Discussing
about the possibility of any legal problem does
nothing else than suggesting that there is really
some possibility of a legal problem. Enough.]

Betov.

< http://betov.free.fr/RosAsm.html >

Loading