[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees
From: |
mlh |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees |
Date: |
Thu, 10 Feb 2005 22:48:34 +1100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 02:01:08PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> I fear that _any_ successful attempt to wring useful meta-data out of
> public sources will be met by similar attempts at obfuscation.
It's more than just threats at obfuscation:
For instance, http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0307.2/1342.html
"Regardless of your legal rights or lack thereof,
should you attempt to reverse engineer BK we'll
simply stop giving BK out for free. See? Simple."
There are arguments in the same thread about the legality
in Europe of reverse engineering for interop versus cloning the app.
--
Matt
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, (continued)
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Miles Bader, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Catalin Marinas, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Miles Bader, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Catalin Marinas, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Miles Bader, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Catalin Marinas, 2005/02/07
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Miles Bader, 2005/02/10
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Catalin Marinas, 2005/02/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Paul Mundt, 2005/02/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees, Catalin Marinas, 2005/02/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch performance with large trees,
mlh <=