Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:33229 comp.unix.bsd:6380 comp.org.eff.talk:9448
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.unix.bsd,comp.org.eff.talk
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!constellation!mimbres.cs.unm.edu!moe.ksu.ksu.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!cs.weber.edu!terry
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Subject: Re: Question on Diamond Clock Synthesizer
Message-ID: <1992Oct12.044838.15514@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Sender: news@fcom.cc.utah.edu
Reply-To: terry@icarus.weber.edu
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center
References: <1b7tmgINNi06@agate.berkeley.edu> <1992Oct11.045446.1020@fcom.cc.utah.edu> <Bvy0H3.Lwq@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> <1b9hudINNmv1@agate.berkeley.edu>
Distribution: inet
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 04:48:38 GMT
Lines: 59
In article <1b9hudINNmv1@agate.berkeley.edu>, curtis@cs.berkeley.edu (Curtis Yarvin) writes:
|> In article <Bvy0H3.Lwq@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes:
|> >In article <1992Oct11.045446.1020@fcom.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes:
|> >>"Batman" posted a message (id <4356bw@gotham.city>) disclosing a clock set
|> >>algorithm for Diamond. Sorry I didn't save it, but it's possibly illegal
|> >>to distribute. It may have been accidently archived somewhere. It will
|> >
|> >It isn't illegal to distribute any more. Diamond has claimed that the
|> >method for setting their dot clocks is protected by trade secret laws.
|> >Unfortuantely, in order for something to be a trade secret, it has to
|> >be just that -- secret.
|>
|> And, also, I didn't think reverse-engineering was illegal in this
|> country. After all, for distribution of a trade secret to be illegal
|> the distributor has to be under nondisclosure contract to the originator -
|> and you certainly don't sign anything like a contract when you buy
|> a Diamond card.
Sorry, reverse engineering may not be illegal, bit it can still be
litigated (and won) by the "damaged" party; please see:
Digital Equipment Corporation vs. EMC^2
The case dealt with whether or not DEC could hold the BI bus proprietary and
corporations engaged in "reverse engineering" it by producing boards (in this
case, memory boards) liable for licensing fees. DEC won, in case you had any
doubts.
|> If "Batman" had contracted with Diamond to do a driver under the conditions
|> that he not release the clock set algorithm, then Diamond would
|> certainly have every right to go after him. If he just discovered it
|> by looking at the driver, then their only weapon could be a patent -
|> and I do doubt that Diamond has patented their clock set algorithm.
Wide spread use of the information may result in "Bruce Wayne, Benefactor"'s
disclosure being litigated by Diamond. Remember that a "trade secret" is not
held to be disclosed until a court decides that this is the case. My
suggestion is to avoid potential litigation by not using the information in
a commercial product. Someone who buys a Diamond product that comes with a
drivers disk can probably claim "use" of an existing driver were they to make
personal use of "Batman"'s posted code. This is probably defnsable under
first use law unless a signed license was returned to Diamond or there was a
"shrink wrap license" involved and the user was in Mississippi or Missouri,
both of which hold "shrink warp licensing" to be valid.
There is a risk inherent in any action which may result in legal action. I
hope "Bruce" knew what the risks were before he disclosed the information.
Terry Lambert
terry@icarus.weber.edu
terry_lambert@novell.com
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have an 8 user poetic license" - me
Get the 386bsd FAQ from agate.berkeley.edu:/pub/386BSD/386bsd-0.1/unofficial
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------