Re: Decompiler Project and Mailing List

[Telford Tendys <telford at eng dot uts dot edu dot au>]

> While a decompiler is certainly a useful tool, producing copylefted
> streaming tools by reverse-engineering proprietary codecs, as the
> free-expression.org website advocates, is the wrong approach.  The problem
> is patents; you can't use a patented technique without licensing the
> patent, or you put yourself at considerable financial risk.

Not all countries actually allow software patents to exist (I believe that
Australia is still one of the free countries in this respect and it makes 
me feel fortunate to be Australian) but I agree that it is ugly to have a
product that can be used in some countries and can't be used in others...
apache-ssl is like this :-(

> Furthermore, you can hardly later claim accidental infringement when the
> big boys come with their lawyers when you've made clear that you've
> obtained your tools by reverse engineering.

Accidental infringement is no protection anyway. Patents cover what you
know and what you don't know too. Basically, you are highly likely to infringe
something even if you roll your own in a quiet, dark cell with no internet
link. Admittedly, by reverse engineering code you are just about guaranteed
to infringe but then you are also in a position to put a little twist
somewhere to deliberately avoid infringement.

Maybe it's just me but I notice that most patents are so abstractly worded
that reading the patent is of very little help in actually understanding
how the algorithm works so if you want to be SURE to avoid infringement you
probably have to reverse engineer ALL the products on the market. Even
then you are open to some generous interpretation of the abstract wording.
Is this too cynical?

> The only way to produce free streaming media is to use algorithms not
> covered by patents.  This is a difficult job, but far from impossible.
> Alternatively, all development could be done in countries that don't
> legally honor software patents, but the result would be tools that
> people in the US and a number of other countries cannot legally use.
> 
> Now that the free software movement has companies in its camp with
> billions of dollars of market capitalization, it should hopefully be
> possible to get enough funding and support to do this right.  Get some
> EE grad student volunteers to help with algorithms, get some legal
> assistance (paid or unpaid) to do patent searches.

Agreed, that would be the right way to do it. Consider the PNG file format
which is the free equivalent to GIF, that was a case of things being done
the right way... however, then the battle continues to make people actually
use the free format.

	- Tel