Reverse Engineering Techniques

Bring out the new improved model with another valuable feature just after the copyist has succeeded in flooding the market with your last version. Stay ahead.

On a sunny day (Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:51:24 +1000) it happened Adrian Jansen wrote in :

One funny thing happened, I wrote a subtitle editor for Linux, and GPLed the code. After a while a website announced a similar commercial product with exactly the same features, sort of copy cats... GPL violation? Then I announced my next version would support EBU format subtitles. And sure enough that website announced 'EBU subtitles in the next version' too. But I could not test my EBU subtitles, as I had not sufficient [free] material. So in the next version I retracted that feature (it is still there but untested). Now that copy cat was in problems :--) Never heard of them again.

If you are worried about your own fab subcontractor, all bets are off (almost).

You've already handed them your data and if the local courts won't help you enforce contracts, you're screwed.

I suppose you could have one outfit make boards and another one stuff them. But that wouldn't prevent someone from x-raying a finished board.

Probably, but surely this is not beyond Jon Slaughter's self-professed engineering skills?

So far they have nothing... I can't stop someone from looking at the final product but I can stop them from blatently ripping off the idea such as the fab company taking the gerbers(even if it's just one of the engineers giving them to his buddy). Ok, I can't stop them but I can surely give them trouble?

Of course this is not so much about my specific product as I doubt they would be interested in wasting their time on it... but it is a general question about protecting ones work.

ld

Here is a question for you. In chips, you can more or less copy one with a few basic rules. One, you can't have been involved in the original project. Provided there is no patent issue, you can copy the chip but not the exact layout. In analog, the chip layout will look different anyway.

Now that all said, can you copyright the board layout? If so, then they could copy the product, but not the exact layout.

I guess my point was that even taken to these extremes, there is no pretense of protecting the circuit or the code inside (i.e. being replicated). The protection is limited to a rather small dataset.

IOW, in general, if they want to copy a widget they will. All you can do is make it marginally more expensive to do so. IOW, a better solution is to sell a service that happens to have hardware attached to it.

If you're worried about the Gerbers being ripped off then you can print your logo on the circuit. Another fab would likely refuse the work. If you're worried about your fab, get another.

In general, you can't protect anything from a sufficiently motivated thief. It's all a matter of degree. Spy vs. spy, as it were.

You don't "copyright" anything. A work is copyrighted by its mere existence and yes that certainly includes board layouts. That hardly matters though. Laws don't stop thieves from stealing.

king

y be

d be

ily

and

would

off

Well yes, China and Florida engineers will do whatever they want.

You sure do like Florida. Did someone there not hire you?

thinking

be

be

would

off

With his bad attitude? Who would hire him?

BTW, other states aren't shy about reverse engineering electronics designed in Florida. Scientific-Atlanta did it to then Ocala based Microdyne years ago. It went to court, and they lost. They basically took a Microdyne design and repackaged it, then replaced the clusters of seven segment LED displays front panel with a large LCD. After the courts forced them to halt production, they contracted Microdyne to complete their contract, and repair existing units. The funny thing was that the changes they made lowered the S/N ratio of the entire system.

Do you think he worked for Scientific-Atlanta? :)

...and that would be one of the most useless anti-RA methods. It would be like putting "Please don't steal this" sign on your TV.

How so? It certainly would give you evidence of theft. Not that evidence will do you any good either.

thinking

be

be

easily

and

would

off

Slowman's employer? Oh, wait...

Maybe. He certainly has a hair across his ass. Of course this is to be expected from a leftist weenie.

All they had to do would be to place a copper pour over it or simply remove it all together. Take a matter of seconds... Hell, they could replace it with their own logo.

petrus bitbyter schrieb:

Hi Pieter,

our stupid news server already deleted my PALASM thread, but I recalled your name and googled for it.

I thank you so much for your assistance with my 22V10 Problem, it´s running flawlessly now.

Greetings to the netherlands

Frank

king

y be

d be

ily

and

would

off

xt -

Yes, but you'll lack standing in court if you don't officially file the copyright. It will be very difficult to collect damages, not that it's not difficult anyway, as you correctly point out. But it's what? $35 to file the copyright?

Also, the "mere existence" does not in fact convey copyright. You must also, at a minimum, include the word "copyright" or the (c) symbol, the date and the entity name. Doesn't hurt to add "All Rights Reserved."

-mpm

Make the logo functional. I read your comment as being counterproductive.