In response to some recent postings, I would like to offer the following on the ethics/legality of reverse engineering. It should be understood that my comments and experience relate only to U.S. law and may, or may not, be applicable elsewhere. I am not an attorney, but I testify all over the U.S. as an expert witness on behalf of injured plaintiffs in litigations involving accidents caused by automatic pedestrian doors of the type commonly seen at shopping malls, hospital entrances, etc. Most often the cause of the accident is a flaw or inherent shortcoming in the design of the sensors used to actuate the door. In many cases, especially when the properties of the sensor are determined in part by an internal programmed microprocessor, I attempt to obtain through the legal discovery process detailed technical design information on the sensor in question. Routinely, the defendant manufacturers object to this discovery request on the grounds that the sensor contains trade secrets that the defendant does not want to be forced to reveal. Aside from various legal protections, such as protective orders that can be issued by the Court that forbid dissemination of the information produced in discovery beyond the case at hand, there is generally no protection afforded the manufacturer under trade secret law. Specifically, it is (within the U.S. at least) what is termed "well established law" that trade secrets are de facto no longer trade secrets once a device containing those "secrets" is put into the stream of commerce, provided only that the sale or ownership of the device is not conditioned on a non-disclosure agreement. That is, provided that the buyer has not, as a condition of sale or ownership, agreed not to reverse engineer or otherwise attempt to discover the "secrets" contained within the device. Otherwise, if the device is obtained by legal means and a non-disclosure agreement was not a condition of sale or ownership, anyone can do absolutely anything otherwise legal to determine how that device is constructed and how it works. Furthermore, once that information is obtained, it can be used in any otherwise legal manner. For example, the information can be used to construct a competing device, which can then be put into the stream of commerce. Many judges I have encountered are sympathetic to industry and readily issue protective orders relating to disclosure of "produced" information, even though the device in question is already in the stream of commerce and is not protected by non-disclosure agreements. I could, if I chose, sign such a protective order. However, I have steadfastly refused because, by not doing so, I remain free under the law to reverse engineer the device and discover for myself, without the assistance of the manufacturer, how the device works. No judge in any case with which I have been involved or of which I am aware has ever claimed that information so obtained (that is, by reverse engineering) is restricted in any way. It may certainly be argued, as some have claimed on this list, that it is unethical to reverse engineer a product. However, at least within the U.S., it is certainly not illegal. On the contrary, the right to do so is protected by law. Cheers, --- Warren F. Davis ================================================ Davis Associates, Inc. 43 Holden Road West Newton, MA 02165 U.S.A. Tel: 617-244-1450 FAX: 617-964-4917 Visit our web site at: http://www.davis-inc.com ================================================