Re: [Gnash-dev] Does the latest Flash Player EULA still prevent people from coding for Gnash?

[Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams]

On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 11:45 -0500, Robinson Tryon wrote:
> If the language about "creating similar software" has been removed
> from the license, does that mean that there is less of a barrier for
> people who have installed the Flash Player client to participate in
> Gnash development?

Correct.

FYI, this is what caused the language to change:

http://www.openscreenproject.org/

> My understanding of laws concerning reverse engineering is limited.
> Could hacking on the Gnash codebase be somehow construed as a
> "derivative work" if you have the Flash Player installed?

The phrase "derivative work" here applies to the Flash plugin itself,
not to the SWF/FLV specs. So, no.

> Could
> actions such as documenting what output the Flash Player gives based
> on certain inputs be judged to be (legally unprotected) reverse
> engineering?

Black-box reimplementation is not considered reverse engineering of the
code, merely of the process, which is not covered by the EULA.

-- 
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <address@hidden>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part