[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DotGNU]RFC : [Proposals]ILAutoStubber Proposal

From: Gopal V
Subject: Re: [DotGNU]RFC : [Proposals]ILAutoStubber Proposal
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:05:50 +0530
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

If memory serves me right, James Michael DuPont wrote:
> but there is a big problem with this :
> you need to link to the non-free lib and have it available to run this
> process.

Nope ... actually running the reflection app with something like 
Assembly.Load() might work well for most of our purposes. This is
not necessarily "linked in" , but the name is provided at runtime.

> > That would solve a lot of issues related to "reverse-engineering"
> > claims.
> I dont agree with your conclusion.
> Any automatic transformation is a process. Derived works are the the
> output of copyrighted input.

Huh ? "Derived works" ? .... All I said was "reverse-engineering" . 
Extracting the API via reflection will look better than a C program
which produces the same output by analzying the binary. It's a thin
line of legality (because the EULA restricts reverse-engineering).

The difference between insanity and genius is measured by success

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]