> > 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. > > > > That's pretty clearly stated. > Isn't it kind of obvious in the case of trade secrets if you buy something, > > then do what amounts > to look at it (reverse engineer), that what you see you can do > whatever you want with? The view that the law takes is not necessarily "obvious" because it attempts to consider the interests of all parties. On the one hand there is your right to free expression in the form of doing what you like with your knowledge and experience, however gained. On the other hand is the right of the manufacturer to protect its investment. How it all plays out is determined by which interest the law deems more important, and when. I wouldn't be surprised if members of this list in countries other than the U.S. labor under very different legal constraints and may well not be free to reverse engineer a product for any purpose, even personal. > What's all this use of the word unethical? You mean if > I use my engineering ability (clearly my property) to look > at a product I am injuring the manufacturer? Do you think that same > manufacturer doesn't look > at competitor's products because it's "unethical"? > I was commenting on the word "unethical" because at least one person on the list felt that reverse engineering was unethical. You are exactly correct. Manufacturers routinely take each others devices to bits to determine what the competition is up to. They couldn't care less whether the practice is unethical or not. But, they might care if the practice is illegal. --- Warren ================================================ 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 ================================================