4 ms·
It kind of depends, doesn't it? The authors have (allegedly, and according to you) committed a GPL violation. The "sins" of the country they live in have noth
by jkic47 3y ago
It kind of depends, doesn't it?
The authors have (allegedly, and according to you) committed a GPL violation.
The "sins" of the country they live in have nothing to do with the situation.
Reverse engineering closed-source software is generally legal, as I understand it, unless the software is patented, in which case, it isn't. If the software is patented, I'd lead towards it being unethical to break a law in your jurisdiction because you (not through a legal system) have unilaterally decided that they committed a violation.
- gus_massa 3y ago> Reverse engineering closed-source software is generally legal, as I understand it, Looking at the inputs and outputs and guessing the implementation is legal, but I guess the OP meand decompiling the executable and using the decompiled source that is ilegal.
- jkic47 3y agoAh got it. If OP meant decompiling the executable and using the source, that could indeed expose them to legal risk.
- adastra22 3y agoTo follow up on this, a lot of people think that if there is a GPL violation, then the composite work automatically becomes covered by the GPL. This is not true. The composite work is a copyright violation, but the GPL terms don’t apply to the proprietary code. “Hacking” the proprietary code is no different than if there had been no GPL violation, under the law.