Re:Removal of Mazda Connected Services Integration
by stavros on Friday October 13, 2023 @04:23PM
(#37875192)
I've reverse engineered many an API, and I've never done it by decompiling the executable. Also, what's illegal about decompiling an executable?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Removal of Mazda Connected Services Integration
by Nextgrid on Friday October 13, 2023 @04:28PM
(#37875243)
They could argue that by viewing the copyrighted code/implementation, you could effectively infringe by (even subconsciously) writing the same/similar code.
There's merits to this claim if you're indeed implementing some advanced, niche algorithm but it definitely wouldn't apply here as all he's doing is calling HTTP APIs, a very generic and common thing to do.
Re:Removal of Mazda Connected Services Integration
by stavros on Friday October 13, 2023 @04:31PM
(#37875273)
Ah, so it's not the act of disassembling that's the problem, but that you're infringing on the original code's copyright? That makes sense, thank you.
Re:Removal of Mazda Connected Services Integration
by angus-prune on Friday October 13, 2023 @04:53PM
(#37875508)
You may have come across this concept already, but this is where clean rooms come in.
One person views the "contaminated" decompiled code and writes a specification. A separate person writes the code based solely on the specification. This is an accepted method of demonstrating that there is no infringement.
Re:Removal of Mazda Connected Services Integration
by stavros on Friday October 13, 2023 @05:38PM
(#37875909)
Yep, I knew of clean-room reimplementations, I was just wondering whether decompiling is somehow in itself illegal.
Re:Removal of Mazda Connected Services Integration
by 6502nerdface on Friday October 13, 2023 @07:03PM
(#37876550)
But disassembling/decompiling doesn't give you anything like the original code!
Re:Removal of Mazda Connected Services Integration
by aidenn0 on Friday October 13, 2023 @07:29PM
(#37876728)
It gives you a derivative work of the original code