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

Re: [dvd-discuss] Bunner wins DeCSS trade secret appeal

Bryan Taylor writes:

> Barr-Mullin, Inc. v. Browning, 108 N.C. App. 590, 424 S.E.2d 226 (1993).
> Plaintiff formerly employed Defendant as a software developer to create "a
> lumber optimization system" to maximize the amount of lumber cut from each log.
> After leaving Plaintiff's employ, Defendant developed and marketed competing
> software. Plaintiff brought suit, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets
> contained in the software source code, and moved for a preliminary injunction.
> Defendant argued that the software could not contain trade secrets since it was
> widely distributed in object code form, which it was possible to reverse
> engineer. The ourt concluded that distribution in object code form alone did
> not negate trade secret protection because of the great difficulty in obtaining
> useful source code by reverse engineering the object code version. The court
> granted a preliminary injunction, based upon testimony that it would have been
> virtually impossible to have created the competing software, based solely on
> reverse engineering Plaintiff's software.

I doubt anybody here would like that decision, but fortunately for
those of us in California (where a lot of the big technology law cases
seem to originate, and where the current DVD trade secret theory is
being argued), that's North Carolina.

Does North Carolina have UTSA legislation?

Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org> | Its really terrible when FBI arrested
Temp.  http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/ | hacker, who visited USA with peacefull
down:  http://www.loyalty.org/   (CAF) | mission -- to share his knowledge with
     http://www.freesklyarov.org/      | american nation.  (Ilya V. Vasilyev)