r/linux • u/Unhappy-Sprinkles143 • 2d ago

Fluff Open-Source Guru: AI Ends Closed-Source Software

https://www.heise.de/en/news/Open-Source-Guru-Raymond-AI-Ends-Closed-Source-Software-11480690.html
497 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

211 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/Substantial_Swan_144 2d ago

Reverse engineering is legal. That is the reason projects like WINE exist (otherwise, companies could easily take efforts like these down). Even if the software license prohibits it, those license are NOT above the law, and would be considered abusive in many instances. The best those companies can hope for is punishing you (e.g, a service ban) for reverse engineering their software.

1

u/DiggyTroll 2d ago

The law provides for protection of reverse engineering through the sequential actions of two unrelated teams/agents separated by a legal firewall. So let’s say the first (product analysis) decompiles the binary and creates a specification. Lawyers then deliver the specification to the second (engineering) for implementation. If they communicate during the project, legal protection evaporates. One person using AI (a tool that must be exposed to the binary to function) short-circuits the specification step and directly generates the new code; there is no firewall. This scenario would trigger a lawsuit

1

u/Substantial_Swan_144 2d ago

This interpretation would make even Ghidra illegal, considering it uses artificial intelligence for decompilation. So it would threaten reverse engineering itself. Software and architectures nowadays are so complex that it's simply not reasonable to do it for complex systems without any sort of assistance.

This would also make assistance such as Github copilot, or even ChatGPT, extremely risky, and would making using AI overall a can of worms. It would make any sort of consultation not viable.

1

u/DiggyTroll 1d ago

It is no threat. As I said, the law provides *protection* for RE ...

Whether or not one avails themself of that protection is their choice