A legal question about obfuscation.

[John T.]

Hi all

Figure this scenario:

- My Company develops an assembly (a controls DLL)
- Since an obfuscation software is too expensive, my Company engages a
consultant and delegates him the assembly obfuscation process
- The consultant uses his (regulary purchased and licensed) obfuscation
software for obfuscate my Company's assembly
- My Company pays the consultant and receive back the obfuscated assembly
- My Company sell the obfuscated assembly on Internet (without having a
licensed copy of the obfuscation software)

In your opinion, is this LEGAL?

Thank you.

John Ti.

[Kevin Spencer]

> In your opinion, is this LEGAL?

Opinions don't count, unless you're a judge. Yes, it's legal.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
Professional Numbskull

Hard work is a medication for which
there is no placebo.

"John T." <no***********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eV**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Hi all

Figure this scenario:

- My Company develops an assembly (a controls DLL)
- Since an obfuscation software is too expensive, my Company engages a
consultant and delegates him the assembly obfuscation process
- The consultant uses his (regulary purchased and licensed) obfuscation
software for obfuscate my Company's assembly
- My Company pays the consultant and receive back the obfuscated assembly
- My Company sell the obfuscated assembly on Internet (without having a
licensed copy of the obfuscation software)

In your opinion, is this LEGAL?

Thank you.

John Ti.

[Greg Young]

Generally I would say things are ok. Your best option is to talk with an
attorney, who is familiar with local practices (i.e. state/federal laws).

Cheers,

Greg Young
"John T." <no***********@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eV**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

Hi all

Figure this scenario:

- My Company develops an assembly (a controls DLL)
- Since an obfuscation software is too expensive, my Company engages a
consultant and delegates him the assembly obfuscation process
- The consultant uses his (regulary purchased and licensed) obfuscation
software for obfuscate my Company's assembly
- My Company pays the consultant and receive back the obfuscated assembly
- My Company sell the obfuscated assembly on Internet (without having a
licensed copy of the obfuscation software)

In your opinion, is this LEGAL?

Thank you.

John Ti.

[Brandon]

I know with Dotfuscator Pro, the license you buy is for each developer that
will be obfuscating anything. In this case, there is still a license legally
purchased for this guy, who is obfuscating what you want. If he's using a
licensed copy of Dotfuscator for his obfuscation, I would think he's in the
clear. For some other obfuscation softwares it may be different.
--
KMG Software, Inc.
Thinking Beyond, Above, and Before
http://www.kmgsoftware.com
"John T." wrote:

Hi all

Figure this scenario:

- My Company develops an assembly (a controls DLL)
- Since an obfuscation software is too expensive, my Company engages a
consultant and delegates him the assembly obfuscation process
- The consultant uses his (regulary purchased and licensed) obfuscation
software for obfuscate my Company's assembly
- My Company pays the consultant and receive back the obfuscated assembly
- My Company sell the obfuscated assembly on Internet (without having a
licensed copy of the obfuscation software)

In your opinion, is this LEGAL?

Thank you.

John Ti.

[Mehdi]

On Tue, 9 May 2006 11:19:59 +0200, John T. wrote:

In your opinion, is this LEGAL?

People here are devlopers, not laywers so even if somebody here tells you
that it's legal, i doubt that the judge will take that into account if it
happens to actually be illegal. Your best bet would be to contact the
licensing department of the compnay that sells the obfuscator that is going
to be used and get a clear and written answer from them about the legality
of what you want to do.

[Jennmac]

Hi all- This is Jenn from PreEmptive Solutions (the creators of
Dotfuscator and DashO). I noticed your recent conversation and wanted
to provide some insight. I am not sure what obfuscation solution the
third party consultant is using but we clearly state our position
within our EULA. Please see sections 2 and 6 of our EULA:

2. Restrictions on Use of Software. Licensee may install and use the
Software only for your internal business purposes. Licensee will not
rent, lease, lend, sublicense, redistribute or otherwise allow third
parties to use the Software directly or indirectly, whether on a time
sharing, remote job entry, or service bureau arrangement or to provide
commercial hosting services to third parties. Subject to the other
terms of this License, Licensor may freely distribute applications that
it has processed using the Software.

6. No Modification Non-Use by Third Parties. Licensee may not modify
the Dotfuscator files, executables, or otherwise. Use of this software
is limited to first party applications. Licensee may not, directly or
indirectly, provide as a service, use of the Software. By way of
example, but not as limitations these includes providing a networked
interface to the software, direct or indirect use of the Software for
other persons by the Licensee, or knowingly allowing third parties to
access the Software. This License is for the use of the Software in
object code form only. Licensee agrees to take all reasonable
precautions to secure the Software from distribution to any third
party.

I do not claim to be a judge or a lawyer. I am just presenting this
information for your review.

If anyone has any questions please feel free to contact me at
je**@preemptive.com. TXS.

[PIEBALD]

So the developer may be OK, but the consultant could be in trouble?

[Göran Andersson]

PIEBALD wrote:

So the developer may be OK, but the consultant could be in trouble?

Yes. Any claim that the creator of the obfuscator software might have
would be against the person or company that bought the license, not
against the third party.

[John T.]

After reading the post of Jenn, I agree with this interpretation.
IMHO, the Company cannot be considered out of law. To the Company is not
required to read EULA of obfuscator software.
Consultant must honour the agreement of the obfuscators' EULA


"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.com> wrote in message
news:Ok**************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

PIEBALD wrote:

So the developer may be OK, but the consultant could be in trouble?

Yes. Any claim that the creator of the obfuscator software might have
would be against the person or company that bought the license, not
against the third party.

[Mehdi]

On Wed, 10 May 2006 09:06:16 +0200, John T. wrote:

After reading the post of Jenn, I agree with this interpretation.
IMHO, the Company cannot be considered out of law. To the Company is not
required to read EULA of obfuscator software.
Consultant must honour the agreement of the obfuscators' EULA

But if the company is fully aware when they hire the consultant that the
whole thing is illegal (as is the OP now), i bet that they'll have to share
their part of responsability too (just as when you buy stolen goods knowing
that they are stolen)

[C-Services Holland b.v.]

PIEBALD wrote:

So the developer may be OK, but the consultant could be in trouble?

Only if the EULA is legal in the country it's used. I've seen plenty of
EULA's that are worth nothing over here (or at least parts of the EULA).
So it's best to check with a lawyer which knows how to deal with EULA's.
--
Rinze van Huizen
C-Services Holland b.v