Re: Westlaw clone (Was: Re: Software to Block Ads)

On 4/2/98, Timothy Arnold-Moore <tja[_at_]mds.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>
> You don't need `virtually identical' software on the server. You need
> software on the substitute server which speaks the same protocol which
> is very, very different. Ari did mention this.

Yep, it's only the outward behavior that has to be duplicated.

> Reverse engineering communications protocols is done all the time.
> (The only complication is if they do some sort of public key
> encryption of the data which then gets decrypted by the client.

Well, there's a second complication, which is that if the protocol is sufficiently novel and nonobvious it can potentially be patented. See, e.g., Atari Games Corp. v. Nintendo of America, Inc, 30 USPQ2d 1401 (N.D. Cal. 1993). However, I doubt very much that West's protocol is patented, or patentable.

> Sorry. I am struggling to think what would need to be changed in the
> client. Could you be more specific? The only factor I can think of is
> the West numbering system and the case headnotes.

Or, alternatively, customers could be told "You can't use the West numbering system with our database. Sorry. But, we only charge you half as much, so who cares?"

-Ari

Ari Kahan
<akahan[_at_]netcom.com>

--
As an anti-spam measure, my mail software ignores any mail without the word
"Sara" in the Subject: line, unless the sender is already on my "no-bounce"
list.  If you want to be sure that your mail reaches me, put the word
"Sara" in the Subject: line.

finger akahan[_at_]netcom.com for PGP Public Key.