their own tools. These found fixes are typically packed to user deployable patches (e.g. with NSIS, Innosetup). If the source code is available, support can by provided most effectively. Sometimes the source code is released intentionally, sometimes by leaking or mistake, such as what happened with the game engine of the Thief series. Sometimes fans even completely reverse-engineer source code from the original program binary. With the source code available even the support of completely different but recent platforms with source ports becomes possible. Law While no court cases have directly addressed the legal ramifications of unofficial patches, similar cases have been tried on related issues. The case of Galoob v. Nintendo found that it was not copyright infringement by a user to apply an unauthorized patch to a system (while the scope was very specific to the Game Genie). On the other hand, the case Micro Star v. FormGen Inc. found that user-generated maps were derivative works of the original game. In Sega v. Accolade, the 9th Circuit held that making copies in the course of reverse engineering is a fair use, when it is the only way to get access to the "ideas and functional elements" in the copyrighted code, and when "there is a legitimate reason for seeking such access". According to Copyright law of the United States 17 U.S. Code § 117, the owner of a copy of a program can modify it as necessary for "Maintenance or Repair", without permission from the copyright holder; an argumentation also raised by Daniel J. Bernstein professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Similar user rights are given also according to European copyright laws. The question of whether unauthorized changes of lawfully obtained copyright-protected software qualify as fair use is an unsettled area of law. An article of Helbraun law firm remarks, in the context of fan translations, that while redistributing complete games with adaptions most likely does not fall under fair use, distributing the modifications as a patch might be legally permissible; however, that conclusion has not been tested in court. Reception Reception of unofficial patches is mixed, but by large, copyright holders are ambivalent. When the software is not considered commercially viable unofficial patches are ignored by the copyright holder as it is not seen as a source of lost revenue. There have been seldom cases of cease and desist letters to unofficial patch and fan