Active Topics

 



Notices
Page 5 of 11 « First 34 5 67 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
Master of Gizmo is offline Master of Gizmo
2010-11-07 , 13:30
Posts: 345 | Thanked: 467 times | Joined on Nov 2007 @ Germany
#41
Originally Posted by WereCatf View Post
It depends on the country in question. Atleast in the US of A it is indeed illegal if the protocol is patented and/or utilizes encryption.
Why is it illegal to reverse engineer something that's patented? If it's patented it's even published.
 
ossipena's Avatar
ossipena is offline ossipena
2010-11-07 , 14:46
Posts: 3,159 | Thanked: 2,023 times | Joined on Feb 2008 @ Finland
#42
Originally Posted by Master of Gizmo View Post
Why is it illegal to reverse engineer something that's patented? If it's patented it's even published.
patent means that the protocol is protected. even if reverse engineering itself would be legal, using the product created with reverse engineering would be illegal...

forcing people to buy brand x device just for using some integrated messaging protocol surely feels idiotic when you have msn, facebook, google talk and ovi chat with one single jabber account connected 24/7 to your n900...
__________________
Want to know something?
K.I.S.S. approach:
wiki category:beginners. Browse it through and you'll be much wiser!
If the link doesn't help, just use
Google Custom Search
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ossipena For This Useful Post:
HtheB's Avatar
HtheB is offline HtheB
2010-11-07 , 15:24
Moderator | Posts: 3,718 | Thanked: 7,420 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Bize Her Yer Trabzon
#43
don't feed the trolls...

He has just 1 post.....
__________________
www.HtheB.com
Please donate if you think I'm doing a good job.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to HtheB For This Useful Post:
dannym is offline dannym
2010-11-07 , 15:32
Posts: 56 | Thanked: 31 times | Joined on Jul 2008 @ Austria
#44
ossipena:

>patent means that the protocol is protected.

What does "protected" mean here?
If you mean that you can't write your own implementation, patents are bad but they are not that bad (yet). You just can't distribute the result.

>even if reverse engineering itself would be legal,

1) It is. (I am not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice)
2) How would anyone know you did?

>using the product created with reverse engineering would be illegal...

No. You can use/create whatever the hell you want on your own devices. At least in free countries.

Maybe you aren't allowed to give it to anyone else, though.
Last edited by dannym; 2010-11-07 at 15:34.
 
WereCatf's Avatar
WereCatf is offline WereCatf
2010-11-07 , 15:45
Posts: 255 | Thanked: 160 times | Joined on Oct 2010 @ Finland
#45
Originally Posted by dannym View Post
What does "protected" mean here?
If you mean that you can't write your own implementation, patents are bad but they are not that bad (yet). You just can't distribute the result.
Actually, you are in breach of a patent even if you are not distributing the result. It's not copyright, copyright law applies when you distribute something, patent law applies always. Thus, even if you didn't distribute the result you'd still be in breach and could be sued legally and there's nothing you can do about it.

(This doesn't apply to countries that do not honor patents)

>even if reverse engineering itself would be legal,

1) It is. (I am not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice)
No, in most countries it isn't. Especially in the USA DMCA explicitly forbids reverse-engineering efforts in almost all cases and you'd be liable and could be sued.

2) How would anyone know you did?
How would you prove that you didn't? If you distribute code that accesses things that could have only been learned through reverse-engineering but you can't prove you learned the methods from someone else you'd most likely be found guilty.
__________________
HAND, n.
A singular instrument worn at the end of the human arm and commonly thrust into somebody's pocket.
 
etuoyo is offline etuoyo
2010-11-07 , 15:50
Posts: 1,179 | Thanked: 770 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#46
Okay so the outlook seems very bleek just as I suspected. What a shame. Guess I am stuck with carrying a blackberry around for the forseeable future. What a shame. Wish Nokia had thought of such a messaging service before RIM and implemented it just as well so all my friends and family would have just stuck with their Nokias instead of getting blackberries and this issue would never have arisen.
 
nidO is offline nidO
2010-11-07 , 15:57
Posts: 278 | Thanked: 303 times | Joined on Feb 2010 @ Norwich, UK
#47
Originally Posted by etuoyo View Post
Okay so the outlook seems very bleek just as I suspected. What a shame. Guess I am stuck with carrying a blackberry around for the forseeable future. What a shame. Wish Nokia had thought of such a messaging service before RIM and implemented it just as well so all my friends and family would have just stuck with their Nokias instead of getting blackberries and this issue would never have arisen.
Essentially, the only reason that BBM exists is because a decade ago americans and canadians didn't know what SMS's were, so Blackberry decided to implement their own messaging system exclusive to their phones. The rest of the world just used SMS's.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to nidO For This Useful Post:
travik is offline travik
2010-11-07 , 16:13
Posts: 80 | Thanked: 33 times | Joined on Apr 2010
#48
Originally Posted by nidO View Post
Essentially, the only reason that BBM exists is because a decade ago americans and canadians didn't know what SMS's were, so Blackberry decided to implement their own messaging system exclusive to their phones. The rest of the world just used SMS's.
Is there some similar phenomenon now that iPhone/Android etc users don't know what instant messaging is, and thus get all excited about whatsapp or whatever this stuff is? I completely don't understand why these things are being used. I'm sure there are plenty of clients (doesn't Fring do instant messaging?) for these devices that use one of the many open protocols that pidgin can handle or the n900 does natively. What on earth is the advantage to using BBM or whatsapp or pingy or whatever these other things are?
 

The Following User Says Thank You to travik For This Useful Post:
RenaldoTT's Avatar
RenaldoTT is offline RenaldoTT
2010-11-07 , 16:21
Posts: 511 | Thanked: 128 times | Joined on Aug 2010 @ Trinidad and Tobago
#49
I doubt the Caribbean governments care about this legal stuff, I mean I live here bal, anyway, interesting thread indeed.
__________________
Trini 2 D' Bone

I miss my N900
Hello DELL Venue Pro Mango
Listen to my music >>> www.reverbnation.com/rrule

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO
 
etuoyo is offline etuoyo
2010-11-07 , 16:33
Posts: 1,179 | Thanked: 770 times | Joined on Nov 2009
#50
Originally Posted by travik View Post
Is there some similar phenomenon now that iPhone/Android etc users don't know what instant messaging is, and thus get all excited about whatsapp or whatever this stuff is? I completely don't understand why these things are being used. I'm sure there are plenty of clients (doesn't Fring do instant messaging?) for these devices that use one of the many open protocols that pidgin can handle or the n900 does natively. What on earth is the advantage to using BBM or whatsapp or pingy or whatever these other things are?
Most heavy chatters have now migrated to BBM. So if you want to chat with them you have to do the same.
 
Reply
Page 5 of 11 « First 34 5 67 Last »

Tags
messaging, no you aren't, pingchat

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:18.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top