Reverse Engineering Rights...

[Ricky]

I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right.. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[John Robertson]

On 2023/05/03 8:53 a.m., Ricky wrote:

I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.

Copyright law only covers ten years for Mask Works:

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ100.pdf

I would like to reverse engineer an 84 pin ASIC developed in the late
80s for example. They are no longer available and the company that holds
the design isn\'t interested in sharing it even though the device has
long been in Public Domain.

Anyone looking for a side project that probably has no money in it? If
we can reverse engineer the device than anyone else can too after all.

John :-#)#


--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John\'s Jukes Ltd.
#7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3
(604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
\"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out.\"

 

[Don Y]

On 5/3/2023 9:25 AM, John Robertson wrote:

I would like to reverse engineer an 84 pin ASIC developed in the late 80s for
example. They are no longer available and the company that holds the design
isn\'t interested in sharing it even though the device has long been in Public
Domain.

*What\'s* in the PD if not the design itself?

Anyone looking for a side project that probably has no money in it? If we can
reverse engineer the device than anyone else can too after all.

Most designs of that era (and the market I assume you are working in)
are purely functional and don\'t really try to do anything to
obfuscate their workings.

Are you sure you can\'t just observe the device and deduce its function?
You don\'t typically care if you are faithfully reproducing the actual
design but, rather, just reproducing the functionality that it provides.

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 3 May 2023 09:25:55 -0700, John Robertson <jrr@flippers.com>
wrote:

On 2023/05/03 8:53 a.m., Ricky wrote:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.



Copyright law only covers ten years for Mask Works:

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ100.pdf

I would like to reverse engineer an 84 pin ASIC developed in the late
80s for example. They are no longer available and the company that holds
the design isn\'t interested in sharing it even though the device has
long been in Public Domain.

Anyone looking for a side project that probably has no money in it? If
we can reverse engineer the device than anyone else can too after all.

John :-#)#

Making a functional equivalent is legal in the USA as long as you
don\'t violate a patent or a copyright. You can design and sell, for
example, a PCB that\'s a drop-in for some other, but you can\'t use
their trace layout, which is copyright artwork. Similarly, an IC mask
is copyright art.

What does that ASIC do?

 

[John Robertson]

On 2023/05/03 10:24 a.m., John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 3 May 2023 09:25:55 -0700, John Robertson <jrr@flippers.com
wrote:

On 2023/05/03 8:53 a.m., Ricky wrote:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.



Copyright law only covers ten years for Mask Works:

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ100.pdf

I would like to reverse engineer an 84 pin ASIC developed in the late
80s for example. They are no longer available and the company that holds
the design isn\'t interested in sharing it even though the device has
long been in Public Domain.

Anyone looking for a side project that probably has no money in it? If
we can reverse engineer the device than anyone else can too after all.

John :-#)#

Making a functional equivalent is legal in the USA as long as you
don\'t violate a patent or a copyright. You can design and sell, for
example, a PCB that\'s a drop-in for some other, but you can\'t use
their trace layout, which is copyright artwork. Similarly, an IC mask
is copyright art.

What does that ASIC do?

It is a controller for a pinball MPU. It basically replaced a pile of
TTL chips.

It could be replaced with a FPGA I assume. I just don\'t have the time or
skills to do that...

What is in the chip:

Clock divider for game - external crystal

Clock divider for Time/Date - external crystal - not essential for game
operation, but nice to keep.

Reset control - has an external Supervisor 3 pin IC

Reset (timed pulses) when MPU locks up or goes off-target

ROM paging and access

RAM paging and access

Blanking (Low) for when the MPU locks up or during Reset.

IO access.

IRQs

....

Wrapped around a 6809E CPU.

Link to schematic:

https://www.flippers.com/pdfs/Williams/Pg_2_WPC_CPU_Board_16-9060_RV1.tif

Thanks,

John :-#)#

--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John\'s Jukes Ltd.
#7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3
(604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
\"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out.\"

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christensen]

onsdag den 3. maj 2023 kl. 17.54.04 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:

I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.

as long as you have legally obtained a product you can reverse engineer it as much as you like

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 2023-05-03 12:25, John Robertson wrote:

On 2023/05/03 8:53 a.m., Ricky wrote:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse
engineer products they have bought.  As an example, the EU provides
for this right.  In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a
board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse
engineer the product supplied.  How does this convey to the board
level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small
circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various
voltages required.  This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which
controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the
system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from
the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse
engineering of its product?  If so, is this true, even if the product
is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to
prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under
question is in a chip level device?  Is this any different? It hard to
imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.



Copyright law only covers ten years for Mask Works:

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ100.pdf

I would like to reverse engineer an 84 pin ASIC developed in the late
80s for example. They are no longer available and the company that holds
the design isn\'t interested in sharing it even though the device has
long been in Public Domain.

Anyone looking for a side project that probably has no money in it? If
we can reverse engineer the device than anyone else can too after all.

John :-#)#

Reverse engineering chips is super common. There are a couple of big
outfits in Canada that can take an advanced-node chip and give you a
transistor-level schematic, including the device characteristics.

In the US, unless I\'m much mistaken, anything that can be learned by
examining a product offered for sale is ipso facto not a trade secret.

Copyright is another matter.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 3 May 2023 10:47:47 -0700, John Robertson <jrr@flippers.com>
wrote:

On 2023/05/03 10:24 a.m., John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 3 May 2023 09:25:55 -0700, John Robertson <jrr@flippers.com
wrote:

On 2023/05/03 8:53 a.m., Ricky wrote:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.



Copyright law only covers ten years for Mask Works:

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ100.pdf

I would like to reverse engineer an 84 pin ASIC developed in the late
80s for example. They are no longer available and the company that holds
the design isn\'t interested in sharing it even though the device has
long been in Public Domain.

Anyone looking for a side project that probably has no money in it? If
we can reverse engineer the device than anyone else can too after all.

John :-#)#

Making a functional equivalent is legal in the USA as long as you
don\'t violate a patent or a copyright. You can design and sell, for
example, a PCB that\'s a drop-in for some other, but you can\'t use
their trace layout, which is copyright artwork. Similarly, an IC mask
is copyright art.

What does that ASIC do?




It is a controller for a pinball MPU. It basically replaced a pile of
TTL chips.

It could be replaced with a FPGA I assume. I just don\'t have the time or
skills to do that...

What is in the chip:

Clock divider for game - external crystal

Clock divider for Time/Date - external crystal - not essential for game
operation, but nice to keep.

Reset control - has an external Supervisor 3 pin IC

Reset (timed pulses) when MPU locks up or goes off-target

ROM paging and access

RAM paging and access

Blanking (Low) for when the MPU locks up or during Reset.

IO access.

IRQs

...

Wrapped around a 6809E CPU.

Link to schematic:

https://www.flippers.com/pdfs/Williams/Pg_2_WPC_CPU_Board_16-9060_RV1.tif

Thanks,

John :-#)#

Sounds like a good use for a Raspberry Pi. There are lots of kids in
maker spaces who would program it for you, maybe fascinated with
pinball machines.

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 3 May 2023 14:00:11 -0400, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

On 2023-05-03 12:25, John Robertson wrote:
On 2023/05/03 8:53 a.m., Ricky wrote:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse
engineer products they have bought.  As an example, the EU provides
for this right.  In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a
board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse
engineer the product supplied.  How does this convey to the board
level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small
circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various
voltages required.  This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which
controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the
system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from
the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse
engineering of its product?  If so, is this true, even if the product
is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to
prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under
question is in a chip level device?  Is this any different? It hard to
imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.



Copyright law only covers ten years for Mask Works:

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ100.pdf

I would like to reverse engineer an 84 pin ASIC developed in the late
80s for example. They are no longer available and the company that holds
the design isn\'t interested in sharing it even though the device has
long been in Public Domain.

Anyone looking for a side project that probably has no money in it? If
we can reverse engineer the device than anyone else can too after all.

John :-#)#



Reverse engineering chips is super common. There are a couple of big
outfits in Canada that can take an advanced-node chip and give you a
transistor-level schematic, including the device characteristics.

In the US, unless I\'m much mistaken, anything that can be learned by
examining a product offered for sale is ipso facto not a trade secret.

Copyright is another matter.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Have you noticed how many data sheet figures are obviously bad copies
of the original?

 

[Don Y]

On 5/3/2023 10:47 AM, John Robertson wrote:
> It is a controller for a pinball MPU. It basically replaced a pile of TTL chips.

So, there\'s nothing magical inside.

Label the pins on the ASIC to clearly identify inputs vs. outputs (and bidirs).

Get out your ML4400 and probe the inputs to the ASIC. Easy guesses are:
- the PoR signal (likely only active ONCE for each power cycle)
- RST to the MPU (derived from POR)
- R/W (from the MPU)
- clock *to* the MPU (6809E has an external clock which is why it
was so commonly used in games as it made bus sharing easier.
Annoying that Motogorilla didn\'t produce second sources for the device!
- FIRQ to the MPU
- Address bus from MPU (unlikely that the ASIC is also a bus master)
- Data to/from both
- SW outputs are decoded from the address bus and bus cycle timing
- PAGE bits are bank select for U6 ROM
- ditto BANK signals to U8 RAM
etc.

Run machine with LA monitoring inputs (trigger on decoded access) and
select outputs to determine which address ranges result in each signals\'
activation.

Over the course of a game, it\'s likely that every pertinent signal
will present in each state so you can notice patterns; don\'t assume
anything is queued in the ASCI beyond some synchronization and
cycle-end delays.

Write a test program to exercise each of these to verify your
deductions.

Zero cross is likely derived from the AC line as they used SCRs
as hammer drivers; the zero crossing would tell the processor when
the SCRs needed to be \"refreshed\".

It could be replaced with a FPGA I assume. I just don\'t have the time or skills
to do that...

If you can fabricate a TTL equivalent, then its relatively easy
to convert that schematic to an FPGA (of suitable size)

There are likely no real performance issues beyond making sure
bank selects are stable before the associated device is accessed
(which could be the next bus cycle). Easy peasy to meet those
sorts of constraints.

What is in the chip:

Clock divider for game - external crystal

Clock divider for Time/Date - external crystal - not essential for game
operation, but nice to keep.

Reset control - has an external Supervisor 3 pin IC

Reset (timed pulses) when MPU locks up or goes off-target

ROM paging and access

RAM paging and access

Blanking (Low) for when the MPU locks up or during Reset.

IO access.

IRQs

...

Wrapped around a 6809E CPU.

Link to schematic:

https://www.flippers.com/pdfs/Williams/Pg_2_WPC_CPU_Board_16-9060_RV1.tif

Thanks,

 

[Martin Brown]

On 03/05/2023 18:53, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

onsdag den 3. maj 2023 kl. 17.54.04 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


as long as you have legally obtained a product you can reverse engineer it as much as you like

Some software contracts for example contain an undertaking not to
reverse engineer or decompile (not that it discourages anyone from doing
it). Sometimes it is the only way to find out what is going wrong in a
defective system library function once you have isolated the fault.

--
Martin Brown

 

[Ricky]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 5:41:00 PM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:

On 03/05/2023 18:53, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
onsdag den 3. maj 2023 kl. 17.54.04 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


as long as you have legally obtained a product you can reverse engineer it as much as you like
Some software contracts for example contain an undertaking not to
reverse engineer or decompile (not that it discourages anyone from doing
it). Sometimes it is the only way to find out what is going wrong in a
defective system library function once you have isolated the fault.

I wonder if such a \"contract\" overrules the EU laws? In the US, the third way of protecting IP is \"trade secret\". Is requires a signed agreement by anyone you sell to, to retain the confidentiality. I\'m thinking it does not provide protection from reverse engineering.

There is little expectation of anyone reverse engineering this design, unless they suspect an infringement of IP. These products are not sold to \"consumers\", but rather industry and government. So I expect the \"rights\" are a bit different. We have a confidentiality agreement, which covers distribution of actual IP, but not the design itself.

Anyone use trade secret to protect their IP?

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christensen]

torsdag den 4. maj 2023 kl. 00.10.37 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 5:41:00 PM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
On 03/05/2023 18:53, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
onsdag den 3. maj 2023 kl. 17.54.04 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


as long as you have legally obtained a product you can reverse engineer it as much as you like
Some software contracts for example contain an undertaking not to
reverse engineer or decompile (not that it discourages anyone from doing
it). Sometimes it is the only way to find out what is going wrong in a
defective system library function once you have isolated the fault.
I wonder if such a \"contract\" overrules the EU laws? In the US, the third way of protecting IP is \"trade secret\". Is requires a signed agreement by anyone you sell to, to retain the confidentiality. I\'m thinking it does not provide protection from reverse engineering.

There is little expectation of anyone reverse engineering this design, unless they suspect an infringement of IP. These products are not sold to \"consumers\", but rather industry and government. So I expect the \"rights\" are a bit different. We have a confidentiality agreement, which covers distribution of actual IP, but not the design itself.

Anyone use trade secret to protect their IP?

once you sell something and the secret can be found from examining the product it is no longer a trade secret

 

[a a]

On Thursday, 4 May 2023 at 00:22:14 UTC+2, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

torsdag den 4. maj 2023 kl. 00.10.37 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 5:41:00 PM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
On 03/05/2023 18:53, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
onsdag den 3. maj 2023 kl. 17.54.04 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


as long as you have legally obtained a product you can reverse engineer it as much as you like
Some software contracts for example contain an undertaking not to
reverse engineer or decompile (not that it discourages anyone from doing
it). Sometimes it is the only way to find out what is going wrong in a
defective system library function once you have isolated the fault.
I wonder if such a \"contract\" overrules the EU laws? In the US, the third way of protecting IP is \"trade secret\". Is requires a signed agreement by anyone you sell to, to retain the confidentiality. I\'m thinking it does not provide protection from reverse engineering.

There is little expectation of anyone reverse engineering this design, unless they suspect an infringement of IP. These products are not sold to \"consumers\", but rather industry and government. So I expect the \"rights\" are a bit different. We have a confidentiality agreement, which covers distribution of actual IP, but not the design itself.

Anyone use trade secret to protect their IP?
once you sell something and the secret can be found from examining the product it is no longer a trade secret

You can claim your title for reverse engineering based
on
interoperability clause

You buy third party\'s product to work for you to meet your needs
--\\



https://www.bing.com/search?q=interoperability+clause&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&ghc=1&lq=0&pq=interoperability+clause&sc=3-23&sk

Interoperability Sample Clauses: 210 Samples | Law Insider
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/interoperability

WebClause: Interoperability Open Split View Cite Interoperability. To the extent required by applicable law, Cisco shall provide You with the interface information needed to achieve interoperability between the Software and another independently created program.
Interoperability | European Data Protection Supervisor
https://edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/subjects/interoperability_en

WebInteroperability refers to the functionality of information systems to exchange data and to enable sharing of information. Several large-scale databases have been set up at EU …
Data Act: Interoperability and Data Sharing Services
https://openfuture.eu/publication/data-act...

The Issue in BriefWhat Is The Commission Proposing?Our Analysis and Recommendations

Interoperability is a key principle that will help achieve the stated goal of the Act: fairness in the allocation of value across the data economy.. Clauses provided in Chapter VIII are crucial to enhance society-wide data sharing. From a user’s perspective, they will also ensure greater agency and control over data. The Data Act offers the opportun...

See more on openfuture.eu
[Explore this image]
Interoperable Europe | Joinup
https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/interoperable-europe

WebInteroperability is the ability of systems to exchange and make use of information. Improved interoperability in the public sector leads to more trust and better communication between public administrations and with …
Technical Specifications for Interoperability | European Union …
https://www.era.europa.eu/domains/technical-specifications-interoperability_en

WebThe Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs) define the technical and operational standards which must be met by each subsystem or part of subsystem in order to meet …
People also ask
What is interoperability and why is it important?… Interoperability refers to the functionality of information systems to exchange data and to enable sharing of information. Several large-scale databases have been set up at EU level to deal with migration, asylum and internal security. These databases contain information about people.
Interoperability | European Data Protection Supervisor
edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/subjects/intero…
What is interoperable Europe?Interoperable Europe is the initiative of the European Commission for a reinforced public sector interoperability policy. The Interoperable Europe Act proposes a strategic interoperability cooperation mechanism across the European Union. This content is hosted by a third party.
Interoperable Europe | Joinup
joinup.ec.europa.eu/interoperable-europe
What are the provisions for data interoperability in the DATA Act?The provisions for data interoperability contained in the proposed Data Act are another step that clarifies the regulatory architecture of common data spaces, by mandating that essential requirements are adopted that specify dataset content, use restrictions, data structures, and technical means accessing the data (including API specifications).
Data Act: Interoperability and Data Sharing Services - openfuture.eu
openfuture.eu/publication/data-act-interoperability-and-d…
What are technical specifications for interoperability?The Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs) define the technical and operational standards which must be met by each subsystem or part of subsystem in order to meet the essential requirements and ensure the interoperability of the railway system of the European Union.
Technical Specifications for Interoperability | European Union Agency
www.era.europa.eu/domains/technical-specifications-inter…
Feedback
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE …
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/... · PDF file

WebMay 22, 2019 · (12) The interoperability components should process the personal data of persons whose personal data are processed in the underlying EU infor mation systems …
INTEROPERABILITY AND CO-OPERATION Sample Clauses | Law …
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/interoperability-and-co-operation

WebInteroperability To the extent required by applicable law, Cisco shall provide You with the interface information needed to achieve interoperability between the Software …
Interoperability Guidelines - OASIS Open
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/interoperability-guidelines

WebInteroperability is generally described as portability when an entity – an artifact, a software component – is expected to be used over a platform – an API, a processor, …
Launch of the European Learning Model - A new step for …
https://europa.eu/europass/pl/news/launch-european...

WebMay 3, 2023 · The European Commission is launching the European Learning Model v.3 (ELM v.3). This first multilingual data model for learning is an exciting new development …
Interoperability Agreements Sample Clauses | Law Insider
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/interoperability-agreements

 

[Don Y]

On 5/3/2023 3:22 PM, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
> once you sell something and the secret can be found from examining the product it is no longer a trade secret

Trade secret really only requires parties to provide the same level
of secrecy to YOUR secrets as they do to their own. So, requires
you to have a good idea of how \"loose lipped\" your partner(s)
will likely be before you share with them.

You also have to be able to demonstrate that *you* took adequate
measures to prevent YOUR secrets from being disclosed. You
can\'t come after me alleging *I* let your secret out if *you*
have been casual about the secrecy.

And, during product development, you may not realize what ideas
or implementation details will want to remain secret. Do you
treat every conversation as a potential \"leak\"?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_of_Silence_(Get_Smart)>

[I had a client who would always want to meet at a particular
restaurant. Food wasn\'t very good. Location wasn\'t either.
BUT, engineers and the like from one of his competitors would
often eat there. My client would take pains to overhear their
discussions as they weren\'t overly careful in what they
would discuss \"out in public\". Nowadays, one has to wonder
how many telephone calls are made where bystanders can
readily overhear the contents of those calls!]

Your recourse is limited to the party who allegedly disclosed
your secret(s). If they don\'t have deep pockets, then the
value of your secret is limited to the depth of those pockets.

It also doesn\'t protect against someone else discovering your
secret(s) by reverse engineering the device. And, thereafter,
disclosing the secret without any legal prohibition against
doing so.

Or, discovering the same \"tricks\" as you have independently
of you.

Once such disclosure has been made, the value of any existing
non-disclosure agreements becomes dubious as one can argue that
the information entered the public domain without any actions
on your part (why should I have to keep a secret that is no
longer secret?)

In practical terms, it\'s best as a short term mechanism to
allow you to gain a foothold in a market. Coincidentally,
filing for patent protection (before the 1 yr trigger) if
you want something that you can sell (the patent) as an asset.

 

[Ricky]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 6:22:14 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:

torsdag den 4. maj 2023 kl. 00.10.37 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 5:41:00 PM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
On 03/05/2023 18:53, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
onsdag den 3. maj 2023 kl. 17.54.04 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


as long as you have legally obtained a product you can reverse engineer it as much as you like
Some software contracts for example contain an undertaking not to
reverse engineer or decompile (not that it discourages anyone from doing
it). Sometimes it is the only way to find out what is going wrong in a
defective system library function once you have isolated the fault.
I wonder if such a \"contract\" overrules the EU laws? In the US, the third way of protecting IP is \"trade secret\". Is requires a signed agreement by anyone you sell to, to retain the confidentiality. I\'m thinking it does not provide protection from reverse engineering.

There is little expectation of anyone reverse engineering this design, unless they suspect an infringement of IP. These products are not sold to \"consumers\", but rather industry and government. So I expect the \"rights\" are a bit different. We have a confidentiality agreement, which covers distribution of actual IP, but not the design itself.

Anyone use trade secret to protect their IP?
once you sell something and the secret can be found from examining the product it is no longer a trade secret

Unless you have the customer sign an agreement about it. They also are required to have their customers sign the same agreement. This is no different from confidential information I suppose. That is typically pushed to anyone else who the information needs to be shared with.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Ricky]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 7:17:49 PM UTC-4, a a wrote:

On Thursday, 4 May 2023 at 00:22:14 UTC+2, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
torsdag den 4. maj 2023 kl. 00.10.37 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 5:41:00 PM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
On 03/05/2023 18:53, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
onsdag den 3. maj 2023 kl. 17.54.04 UTC+2 skrev Ricky:
I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


as long as you have legally obtained a product you can reverse engineer it as much as you like
Some software contracts for example contain an undertaking not to
reverse engineer or decompile (not that it discourages anyone from doing
it). Sometimes it is the only way to find out what is going wrong in a
defective system library function once you have isolated the fault.
I wonder if such a \"contract\" overrules the EU laws? In the US, the third way of protecting IP is \"trade secret\". Is requires a signed agreement by anyone you sell to, to retain the confidentiality. I\'m thinking it does not provide protection from reverse engineering.

There is little expectation of anyone reverse engineering this design, unless they suspect an infringement of IP. These products are not sold to \"consumers\", but rather industry and government. So I expect the \"rights\" are a bit different. We have a confidentiality agreement, which covers distribution of actual IP, but not the design itself.

Anyone use trade secret to protect their IP?
once you sell something and the secret can be found from examining the product it is no longer a trade secret
You can claim your title for reverse engineering based
on
interoperability clause

You buy third party\'s product to work for you to meet your needs
--\\



https://www.bing.com/search?q=interoperability+clause&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&ghc=1&lq=0&pq=interoperability+clause&sc=3-23&sk=


Interoperability Sample Clauses: 210 Samples | Law Insider
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/interoperability

WebClause: Interoperability Open Split View Cite Interoperability. To the extent required by applicable law, Cisco shall provide You with the interface information needed to achieve interoperability between the Software and another independently created program.
Interoperability | European Data Protection Supervisor
https://edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/subjects/interoperability_en

WebInteroperability refers to the functionality of information systems to exchange data and to enable sharing of information. Several large-scale databases have been set up at EU …
Data Act: Interoperability and Data Sharing Services
https://openfuture.eu/publication/data-act...

The Issue in BriefWhat Is The Commission Proposing?Our Analysis and Recommendations

Interoperability is a key principle that will help achieve the stated goal of the Act: fairness in the allocation of value across the data economy. Clauses provided in Chapter VIII are crucial to enhance society-wide data sharing. From a user’s perspective, they will also ensure greater agency and control over data. The Data Act offers the opportun...

See more on openfuture.eu
[Explore this image]
Interoperable Europe | Joinup
https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/interoperable-europe

WebInteroperability is the ability of systems to exchange and make use of information. Improved interoperability in the public sector leads to more trust and better communication between public administrations and with …
Technical Specifications for Interoperability | European Union …
https://www.era.europa.eu/domains/technical-specifications-interoperability_en

WebThe Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs) define the technical and operational standards which must be met by each subsystem or part of subsystem in order to meet …
People also ask
What is interoperability and why is it important?… Interoperability refers to the functionality of information systems to exchange data and to enable sharing of information. Several large-scale databases have been set up at EU level to deal with migration, asylum and internal security. These databases contain information about people.
Interoperability | European Data Protection Supervisor
edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/subjects/intero…
What is interoperable Europe?Interoperable Europe is the initiative of the European Commission for a reinforced public sector interoperability policy. The Interoperable Europe Act proposes a strategic interoperability cooperation mechanism across the European Union. This content is hosted by a third party.
Interoperable Europe | Joinup
joinup.ec.europa.eu/interoperable-europe
What are the provisions for data interoperability in the DATA Act?The provisions for data interoperability contained in the proposed Data Act are another step that clarifies the regulatory architecture of common data spaces, by mandating that essential requirements are adopted that specify dataset content, use restrictions, data structures, and technical means accessing the data (including API specifications).
Data Act: Interoperability and Data Sharing Services - openfuture.eu
openfuture.eu/publication/data-act-interoperability-and-d…
What are technical specifications for interoperability?The Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSIs) define the technical and operational standards which must be met by each subsystem or part of subsystem in order to meet the essential requirements and ensure the interoperability of the railway system of the European Union.
Technical Specifications for Interoperability | European Union Agency
www.era.europa.eu/domains/technical-specifications-inter…
Feedback
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE …
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/... · PDF file

WebMay 22, 2019 · (12) The interoperability components should process the personal data of persons whose personal data are processed in the underlying EU infor mation systems …
INTEROPERABILITY AND CO-OPERATION Sample Clauses | Law …
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/interoperability-and-co-operation

WebInteroperability To the extent required by applicable law, Cisco shall provide You with the interface information needed to achieve interoperability between the Software …
Interoperability Guidelines - OASIS Open
https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/interoperability-guidelines

WebInteroperability is generally described as portability when an entity – an artifact, a software component – is expected to be used over a platform – an API, a processor, …
Launch of the European Learning Model - A new step for …
https://europa.eu/europass/pl/news/launch-european...

WebMay 3, 2023 · The European Commission is launching the European Learning Model v.3 (ELM v.3). This first multilingual data model for learning is an exciting new development …
Interoperability Agreements Sample Clauses | Law Insider
https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/interoperability-agreements

Lots of words. Not sure how they apply to my situation.

\"Interoperability is a key principle that will help achieve the stated goal of the Act: fairness in the allocation of value across the data economy\".

I don\'t even know what this means.

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Flyguy]

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 8:54:04 AM UTC-7, Ricky wrote:

I know that some regions provide the right of a consumer to reverse engineer products they have bought. As an example, the EU provides for this right. In the US, not so much. If a supplier provides a board level component to an OEM, the consumer has the right to reverse engineer the product supplied. How does this convey to the board level component?

For example, a product is sold for office use, which contains a small circuit board to convert power from the 12VDC input, to the various voltages required. This power circuit board contains a CPU/DSP, which controls the power conversions, and communicates with the rest of the system to enable/disable sections, and report status.

Will this power circuit board, being made by a company separate from the OEM supplying the product, be under obligation to allow reverse engineering of its product? If so, is this true, even if the product is not produced in the EU?

Is there any way for the manufacturer of the power circuit board to prevent legal reverse engineering of their product in the EU?

Likewise, what rights apply to a similar situation, where the IP under question is in a chip level device? Is this any different? It hard to imagine a chip level device being reverse engineered by an end user.


--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

Reverse engineering is also known as intellectual theft. Whether it is legal or not is another issue - the act involves the theft of the intellect of the original designer. The ChICOMs, of course, are the masters of intellectual theft.

 

[a a]

>

Darius the Dumb has posted yet one more #veryStupidByLowIQaa article.

 

[John Robertson]

On 2023/05/03 12:59 p.m., Don Y wrote:

On 5/3/2023 10:47 AM, John Robertson wrote:
It is a controller for a pinball MPU. It basically replaced a pile of
TTL chips.

So, there\'s nothing magical inside.

Label the pins on the ASIC to clearly identify inputs vs. outputs (and
bidirs).

Get out your ML4400 and probe the inputs to the ASIC.  Easy guesses are:

Are/were you on TechToolsList? Wouldn\'t surprise me.

Retired the ML4400 over a decade ago...it is just sitting on a shelf
waiting for (whatever happens to old equipment). I\'ve graduated to a
HP1662C LA - 64 inputs should be enough to crack this ASIC using your
suggestions.

- the PoR signal (likely only active ONCE for each power cycle)
- RST to the MPU (derived from POR)
- R/W (from the MPU)
- clock *to* the MPU (6809E has an external clock which is why it
  was so commonly used in games as it made bus sharing easier.
  Annoying that Motogorilla didn\'t produce second sources for the device!
- FIRQ to the MPU
- Address bus from MPU (unlikely that the ASIC is also a bus master)
- Data to/from both
- SW outputs are decoded from the address bus and bus cycle timing
- PAGE bits are bank select for U6 ROM
- ditto BANK signals to U8 RAM
etc.

Run machine with LA monitoring inputs (trigger on decoded access) and
select outputs to determine which address ranges result in each signals\'
activation.

Over the course of a game, it\'s likely that every pertinent signal
will present in each state so you can notice patterns; don\'t assume
anything is queued in the ASCI beyond some synchronization and
cycle-end delays.

Write a test program to exercise each of these to verify your
deductions.

Zero cross is likely derived from the AC line as they used SCRs
as hammer drivers; the zero crossing would tell the processor when
the SCRs needed to be \"refreshed\".

It could be replaced with a FPGA I assume. I just don\'t have the time
or skills to do that...

If you can fabricate a TTL equivalent, then its relatively easy
to convert that schematic to an FPGA (of suitable size)

There are likely no real performance issues beyond making sure
bank selects are stable before the associated device is accessed
(which could be the next bus cycle).  Easy peasy to meet those
sorts of constraints.

Thanks! - that is more in depth planning than I had gotten to so far.
It will help if I can\'t get a volunteer to assist...

John :-#)#

What is in the chip:

Clock divider for game - external crystal

Clock divider for Time/Date - external crystal - not essential for
game operation, but nice to keep.

Reset control - has an external Supervisor 3 pin IC

Reset (timed pulses) when MPU locks up or goes off-target

ROM paging and access

RAM paging and access

Blanking (Low) for when the MPU locks up or during Reset.

IO access.

IRQs

...

Wrapped around a 6809E CPU.

Link to schematic:

https://www.flippers.com/pdfs/Williams/Pg_2_WPC_CPU_Board_16-9060_RV1.tif

Thanks,

--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John\'s Jukes Ltd.
#7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3
(604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
\"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out.\"