Searching \ for '[OT] Re: reverse-engineering for commercial gain' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=reverse+engineering
Search entire site for: 'Re: reverse-engineering for commercial gain'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Re: reverse-engineering for commercial gain'
1998\05\29@081426 by Walter Banks

picon face
----------
> From: Eric Smith <spam_OUTericTakeThisOuTspamBROUHAHA.COM>
> I can buy one copy, modify that copy, and sell it to another party.
> I am left with zero copies.  I haven't created any new copies,
> except possible a transient copy that was necessary to the process of
> modification.

The process you describe will violate its copyright in most countries.  In
the US the 1% rule in liability gives the copyright holder a vested
financial
interest in this kind of activity.

Reverse engineering for commercial gain lowers the amount of risk that a
company will take in the development of new technology. This in turn will
slow the discovery of new technology and techniques.


Walter Banks

1998\05\29@104326 by Andy Kunz

flavicon
face
>Reverse engineering for commercial gain lowers the amount of risk that a
>company will take in the development of new technology. This in turn will
>slow the discovery of new technology and techniques.

However, the company doing the reverse engineering will be introducing
their clone much later than the original company, and will therefore only
be able to compete based on cost (which will of course be much lower since
they won't have as much of the engineering overhead).  This will benefit
consumers by giving them a choice of source as well as a less-expensive
product (if you can wait 1-2 years for it to come out).

In the meantime, the original company will be working away on the next
generation, and will (hopefully) have recouped their engineering investment
on the earlier product, so the introduction of a clone will not be totally
deleterious.

In an effort to compete against the low-price clone, the original company
will be forced to enhance the feature set.  That is good for the consumers,
too, but it also ENHANCES the discovery of new technology and techniques.

This is probably the reason that, as fast as the thrid-world Far East
countries are moving forward, that the West is still so far ahead, and
likely to remain so.

Andy

==================================================================
Andy Kunz - Statistical Research, Inc. - Westfield, New Jersey USA
==================================================================

1998\05\29@151736 by Morgan Olsson

picon face
At 08:12 1998-05-29 -0400, you wrote:
>----------
>> From: Eric Smith <.....ericKILLspamspam@spam@BROUHAHA.COM>
>> I can buy one copy, modify that copy, and sell it to another party.
>> I am left with zero copies.  I haven't created any new copies,
>> except possible a transient copy that was necessary to the process of
>> modification.
>
>The process you describe will violate its copyright in most countries.  In
>the US the 1% rule in liability gives the copyright holder a vested
>financial
>interest in this kind of activity.

?! Strange. Why? The original manufacturer get their earned money when they
sell the original product. Why should they earn on the next mans work?  The
fence manufacturer do not get paid anything when a craftsman improves the
fence in some way...

>Reverse engineering for commercial gain lowers the amount of risk that a
>company will take in the development of new technology. This in turn will
>slow the discovery of new technology and techniques.

Or speed them up.
The one who adds the new functions maybe add just that new top technology,
but could not himself develop the whole product.

/Morgan

>Walter Banks
>
>
/  Morgan Olsson, MORGANS REGLERTEKNIK, SE-277 35 KIVIK, Sweden \
\  mrtspamKILLspaminame.com, ph: +46 (0)414 70741; fax +46 (0)414 70331    /

1998\05\30@061024 by paulb

flavicon
face
Andy Kunz wrote:

> In an effort to compete against the low-price clone, the original
> company will be forced to enhance the feature set.  That is good for
> the consumers, too, but it also ENHANCES the discovery of new
> technology and techniques.

 My goodness!  I4m so glad to see a *progressive* spirit amongst the
"big names" (obvious professionals) on this list.  Not everyone hides in
damp caves then!

 Cheers,
       Paul B.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998 , 1999 only
- Today
- New search...