:::You're exactly right. The truth is that IP law is a very strange beast. I think the discussions about morals and ethics are valid though, and sadly, they are different. What is legal and what is ethical isn't exactly the same thing. I think part of what grinds on Mike is a moral objection, but the legal aspects are worth looking at too.:::

Glad to see you get it... that there is an ethical dimension perhaps greater than any legal dimension to the practice of pirating designs that do not belong to you.

And as you suggest... there are other laws governing "fair competition", "fair trade practices" and the like at both the federal and state levels. Problem is, also, and these turkeys hide behind the following... that the cost to prosecute these ethical neanderthals is often greater than their entire net worth... and they exploit their poverty status to exact the riches (no matter how modest) of their victims without often incurring any penalties.

:::An example is the sale of trademarks by search engines.:::

yeah... this sucks as well.

:::Another example is reverse engineering. In the United States and many other countries, reverse-engineering is legal as long as it is obtained legitimately, even if the device is protected by trade secrets.:::

I've shared with you privately my concerns also about this... as I understand the issue... what is ART's stance going to be on protection of non-patented (and perhaps non-patentable) proprietary designs such as a complete circuit design that is the creation of person or company X... can a Dougie come on the board and advertise his "copy" of, "reverse engineering", and then use ART to compete against that company?

Seems to me there should be a blanket prohibition against exploiting and profiteering of another person or companies IP. Some cases might not be 100% clear cut... others are as clear as the sun at high noon.

thanks wayne...

msl