Comments on: Reverse Engineering Music… http://www.computerdefense.org/2006/09/reverse-engineering-music/ Sharing my thoughts with the world. Mon, 26 Jul 2010 03:10:24 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Striek http://www.computerdefense.org/2006/09/reverse-engineering-music/comment-page-1/#comment-27 Striek Fri, 08 Sep 2006 07:09:04 +0000 http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=89#comment-27 [quote]Remember: They are just musicians that are reverse engineering the song. They’re no different than the members of the security community that reverse engineer software.[/quote] That's the problem. In most EULA's I've seen, reverse engineering is spsecifically forbidden. If I own a copy of Server 2003, I can throw all the data I want at it, hoping to find my data in an instruction pointer when it crashes. That cannot be prohibited by law (at least in Canada), however, I cannot attempt to recreate the original source code. I cannot even traslate it into ASM according to most of the licenses I see. This is done specifically to prevent people from reproducing thier work and subsequently allowing them to publish it as originals, using the ideas and methods of the copyright holder. If I can't reverse engineer your code, I can't make a derivative work and claim it as my own. Higher profile contracts will, in some cases, specifically grant the right to reverse engineer software to as part of an audit, but this option is not available to the rest of us. So if security engineers can't reverse engineer, why can musicians? (although I do think it has a valid argument as far as it being used as a teaching tool under the "fair use" clause.) [quote]Remember: They are just musicians that are reverse engineering the song. They’re no different than the members of the security community that reverse engineer software.[/quote]

That’s the problem. In most EULA’s I’ve seen, reverse engineering is spsecifically forbidden. If I own a copy of Server 2003, I can throw all the data I want at it, hoping to find my data in an instruction pointer when it crashes. That cannot be prohibited by law (at least in Canada), however, I cannot attempt to recreate the original source code. I cannot even traslate it into ASM according to most of the licenses I see.

This is done specifically to prevent people from reproducing thier work and subsequently allowing them to publish it as originals, using the ideas and methods of the copyright holder. If I can’t reverse engineer your code, I can’t make a derivative work and claim it as my own.

Higher profile contracts will, in some cases, specifically grant the right to reverse engineer software to as part of an audit, but this option is not available to the rest of us. So if security engineers can’t reverse engineer, why can musicians?

(although I do think it has a valid argument as far as it being used as a teaching tool under the “fair use” clause.)

]]>