[devn00b]

B. Reverse engineering

Copyrighted software ordinarily contains both copyrighted
and unprotected or functional elements. Sega Enters. Ltd. v.
Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510, 1520 (9th Cir. 1993) (amended
opinion); see 17 U.S.C. S 102(b) (Copyright protection does
not extend to any "idea, procedure, process, system, method
of operation, concept, principle, or discovery" embodied in
the copyrighted work.). Software engineers designing a prod-
uct that must be compatible with a copyrighted product fre-
quently must "reverse engineer" the copyrighted product to
gain access to the functional elements of the copyrighted
product. See Andrew Johnson-Laird, Software Reverse Engi-
neering in the Real World, 19 U. Dayton L. Rev. 843, 845-46
(1994).

Reverse engineering encompasses several methods of gain-
ing access to the functional elements of a software program.
They include: (1) reading about the program; (2) observing
"the program in operation by using it on a computer;"
(3) performing a "static examination of the individual com-
puter instructions contained within the program; " and
(4) performing a "dynamic examination of the individual
computer instructions as the program is being run on a
computer." Id. at 846. Method (1) is the least effective,
because individual software manuals often misdescribe the
real product. See id. It would be particularly ineffective in this
case because Sony does not make such information available
about its PlayStation. Methods (2), (3), and (4) require that
the person seeking access load the target program on to a
computer, an operation that necessarily involves copying the
copyrighted program into the computer's random access
memory or RAM.

Please note EQEMU falls under the above

[5] The question then becomes whether the methods by
which Connectix reverse-engineered the Sony BIOS were
necessary to gain access to the unprotected functional ele-
ments within the program. We conclude that they were. Con-
nectix employed several methods of reverse engineering
(observation and observation with partial disassembly) each
of which required Connectix to make intermediate copies of
copyrighted material. Neither of these methods renders fair
use protection inapplicable. Sega expressly sanctioned disas-
sembly. See id. at 1527-28. We see no reason to distinguish
observation of copyrighted software in an emulated computer
environment. Both methods require the reverse engineer to
copy protected as well as unprotected elements of the com-
puter program. Because this intermediate copying is the gra-
vamen of the intermediate infringement claim, see 17 U.S.C.
S 106(1); Sega, 977 F.2d at 1518-19, and both methods of
reverse engineering require it, we find no reason inherent in
these methods to prefer one to another as a matter of copy-
right law. Connectix presented evidence that it observed the
Sony BIOS in an emulated environment to observe the func-
tional aspects of the Sony BIOS. When this method of reverse
engineering was unsuccessful, Connectix engineers disassem-
bled discrete portions of the Sony BIOS to view directly the
ideas contained therein. We conclude that intermediate copy-
ing in this manner was "necessary" within the meaning of
Sega.

This was taken from Sony VS Connectix (another PSX Emulator)

Care to debate anymore? if so i can throw up more. its np to me...but please know the facts before you spew crap acting like you know what it is.