Chris Eddy <ceddy@NB.NET> writes:
> But breaking open my product and removing the methods of how that device
> operates in the name of 'speedy research and development' is stealing my
> intelectual property.  If some company puts tons of time and effort into
> making a device that is real cool, like a hammer that detects studs (true
> app that a friend is involved with) you would certainly be incenced by
> someone who studies the code and says, "Oh, you have a such and such
> waveform and look for the such and such event on the return".  They
> figure that they can emulate the process, while not copying the code
> outright, and they haven't done something wrong.  I beg to differ.

Here we encounter the difference between law and ethics.  The situation you
describe is not inherently unlawful.  Different people will have varying
opinions on whether it is unethical.

US law does not prohibit reverse-engineering in the sense you describe.  It
only prohibits manufacture and sale of a product derived in this manner in
three cases:

1)  The first company had a patent on the technique, which the second
    company infringes.

2)  The second company relied on additional information which they obtained
    in an unlawful manner.  For instance, the first company might consider
    the method to be a trade secret, but the second company hires an
    ex-employee of the first company who tells them how it works.

3)  The second company violates an NDA or other contract with the first
    company, and uses information from the first company for purposes
    prohibited by the contract.

Cheers,
Eric