Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 23:48:57 -0400,
Paul Allen Newell <pnewell(a)cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
> If doing a "black-box" only job of "reverse engineering" requires
one to
> load memory with a trademark, how does this fall into the realm of
> acceptable?
There was a court case where a company was using a copyrighted phrase
for access control. A competitor won when they also used the same phrase
for access control purposes.
That was a long time ago and people seemed to feel that when a customer
bought something, they owned it. In today's environment that case might
have gone differently.
Judging from the Apple jail breaking case a few days ago, I'm guessing no vendor
is eager to see how much they can restrict people from using hardware they
bought. Just my read, I am not a lawyer.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot