Bracket Company Warns Founder Over Pump.fun Code Usage
The legal action challenges the reverse engineering and planned public release of proprietary contract code.
Updated on Oct. 30, 2026 in Software
Live Poll
Should developers be allowed to reverse engineer and publish proprietary software code without permission?
Bracket Company has issued a formal warning to Eliza Labs founder Shaw Walters, demanding he cease efforts to reverse-engineer and publish the Pump.fun contract source code. The legal notice follows claims by Walters that he successfully reconstructed nearly all of the proprietary platform code.
Why it matters
This dispute centers on the boundaries of reverse engineering in proprietary software and the legal implications of reproducing contract code without authorization. It highlights the tension between open-source advocacy and the intellectual property protections governing digital financial platforms.
Shaw Walters reported that he reverse-engineered 97.6% of the Pump.fun contract code. Of that total, he claims 80% represents an exact byte-level match to the original proprietary code.
The players
Bracket Company
The entity managing Pump.fun, a platform governed by proprietary code and restricted terms of service.
Shaw Walters
The founder of Eliza Labs who publicly claimed to have reverse-engineered the Pump.fun contract code.
Brown Rudnick
A law firm acting on behalf of Bracket Company to enforce intellectual property rights.
The details
Reverse engineering involves analyzing a compiled binary or bytecode to deduce the underlying source code. In this instance, Walters targeted the Pump.fun contract set, a series of pre-compiled instructions that manage the platform's execution logic. Bracket Company alleges that reproducing this logic violates U.S. copyright law and the platform's terms of service, which typically prohibit decompilation and redistribution of proprietary assets.
Timeline
October 27, 2026: Walters claims reverse-engineering progress on X.
October 28, 2026: Walters posts additional claims regarding code matching on X.
October 29, 2026: Bracket Company issues a formal warning letter via Brown Rudnick.
The Tech Race
This conflict highlights the ongoing legal friction surrounding software IP and the reproduction of proprietary contract logic. It follows established precedents set by cases like the Google v. Oracle America API copyright dispute concerning the boundaries of fair use and reverse engineering.
The dispute centers on potential future releases of reconstructed contract code intended for public repositories. Developers and users should monitor whether the code remains restricted or if public bounty programs involving $PMUP tokens move forward.
The takeaway
The immediate trajectory depends on whether the legal pressure from Bracket Company prevents the intended release of the reconstructed code. Observers should track if Walters moves to publish the repository or if the project remains stalled under threat of litigation.
Further reading
For broader context on current intellectual property developments, visit the Software section.
Live Poll
Should developers be allowed to reverse engineer and publish proprietary software code without permission?
