Re: Defendant wins breathalyzer source code

In article <1186738562.4545.0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Tom Lucas <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
"Thad Smith" <ThadSmith@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46bbdcef$0$79273$892e0abb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mark McDougall wrote:
Martin Griffith wrote:

so I assume they would need the "text" code with comments.

If I was ordered to hand over source code, I sure as hell wouldn't be
offering a version that had comments in it!!!

It could be one for the lawyers, but my interpretation of source is
"what the programmer wrote in the source files", which includes the
comments. Source refers to more than the code that the compiler used.
If I were in that situation, I would ask for specifications, user
manuals, design notes, bug reports, and all other documents that might
shed light on the design, weaknesses, problems, etc.

I would disagree with that. I would say that the machine code is what is
controlling the breathalyzer and the source code is what was used to
describe to the compiler what the machine code is to do. The commentary
and pretty formatting and other aids to understanding do not have any
bearing on the function of the breathalyzer and so there would be no
justification to provide them.

The justification is they are aids to understanding. The other point is the defence would ask for them and if you argue, prevaricate or equivocate the defence and jury would "know" you had something to hide.

The court ordered the disclosure of the
method of operation and uncommented and unformatted source code will
achieve that.

However, deliberately removing aids to understanding could be argued to
be obstructing the judge's orders.

It will be highlighted by the defence. That is part of the game. Why do you think solicitors and barristers ask questions they immediately withdraw.... to set the idea in the head of the jury.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ chris@xxxxxxxxxxxx www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How do I approach this?
    ... software before you have an understanding about ownership. ... their time you further complicate the situation. ... >>> recently regarding the source code. ...
    (microsoft.public.vstudio.development)
  • Re: How to read log files
    ... kernel log, messages, dmesg, and such? ... I have been googling but found ... there is always the source code *horror*. ... Understanding log files is - while not art - sometimes hard labor. ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: Division inconsistent between Debug/Release builds
    ... > In addition to Mattias' suggestion on understanding what might be going ... > I would also recommend explicitly defining what you want it to do. ... can't break into the source code. ... how the toolbar button code is implemented? ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb)
  • Re: How safe is intellectual property in compiled binaries?
    ... Will people be able to disassemble/decompile your code to view the source code? ... At this point, you've probably spent some time working with other people's programs, and thus you should be aware that for a large computer program, understanding it _with_ the benefit of the proper source code and comments and so forth can take months. ... I will probably speak to my supervisors when my thesis submission date is closer, but I'm interested to hear from the PhD holders here -- whether you think it is a good idea to "dumb down" the program you submit with your thesis, so that you alone remain the only person who can do this-or-that. ... Beyond that, I owe a debt to other authors who put their algorithms out in public -- their publications saved me months of work in getting results, and notably improved the results that I did get. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)