4 ms·
Wouldn't that depend on local laws? My assumption is that it would be covered by the recent EU court ruling that allows reverse engineering to fix bugs[0]. [0]
by skyeto 5y ago
Wouldn't that depend on local laws? My assumption is that it would be covered by the recent EU court ruling that allows reverse engineering to fix bugs[0].
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28809559 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28809559
- Mindwipe 5y agoIt definitely would not be because that ruling does not overrule other bits of legislation, such as the prohibition against distribution or importation of tools to circumvent technical protection measure that all EU countries have.
- White_Wolf 5y agoit does if the software is not working(like in this case). "the legitimate purchaser of a program is entitled to decompile that program in order to correct errors affecting its operation" https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f5b1193c-f423-4f96-bca5-03f5145ecf15 https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f5b1193c-f423...
- krageon 5y agoThe main point here is to figure out if it no longer working is actually considered an error or whether it might be a planned feature.
- Mindwipe 5y agoNo, this is misinformation. That ruling just states that it is not a copyright breach to decompile a program to correct errors. It does not grant a carte blanche against other laws. DRM circumvention laws are separate offenses and are not overridden.
- skyeto 5y agoThe parent comments were talking about applying a crack to a legitimately obtained copy (which I assume the case covers) and not the act of distributing a cracked copy (which it definitely doesn't cover).