From: bart@netcom.com (Harry Bartholomew)
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 94 04:36:32 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: DDJ editorial
Message-ID: <199412241236.EAA13217@netcom14.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



    I think this sentence was missing a NOT:

                                    If, as some claim and RSA disputes, the
  code was reverse-engineered from object files in off-the-shelf software,
  then the law was probably broken - unless RSA and other vendors decide to
  test the strength of highly questionable and likely unenforceable
  shrink-wrap licenses that try to prohibit disassembly/decompilation.  

    (But I don't have the DDJ to verify this)