Microsoft is also claiming that Datel copied the "authentication" code, byte-for-byte, from Microsoft's own hardware.
Up to this point, Datel has been very resistant to discovery requests regarding that code. If it turns out to be true, then they'll likely lose handily. It won't set a bad DMCA precedent, but it's a shame for consumers.
Wired is hosting a copy of Microsoft's motion to compel discovery, which contains all kinds of neat bits regarding the reversing (or lack thereof) of the handshake code in the peripherals:
Since the meat of their (er, my) copyright defense hinged on section 117 of the Copyright Act: one cannot infringe copyright in a piece of software by copying it to RAM if that copy is an essential step in using the software. This applies to an "owner of a copy", just like section 109 with regards to selling.
However, Vernor's precedent will probably mean that WoW customers do not own their copies of the game and thus are not protected by section 117. This is deeply troubling for any integration with shrink-wrap software, as it means the developers of the software can turn add-on developers into copyright infringers with the stroke of a pen.
It's just another sign of how badly out of sync copyright law and technology are. The original purpose of the Copyright Act is a distant memory at this point: companies use it to prop up all kinds of bad business (and game) models. There's always a copy somewhere and, more importantly, you don't need to show damages.
That's the real scary part. Blizzard doesn't need to show that Glider or the SC2 radar or any of those products hurt them. Amend the EULA, file paperwork, seek huge statutory damages.
It's particularly obvious in the SC2 radar because the tools are all open source: Blizzard is using the Copyright Act to *prevent* the free flow of perfectly legal (sans EULA, authored by Blizzard) creative work. It doesn't get any more disgusting than that.
Disclaimer: I am very biased in this case, as easily noted by my name.
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by Michael Donnelly.
DMCA argument may be moot.
Microsoft is also claiming that Datel copied the "authentication" code, byte-for-byte, from Microsoft's own hardware.
Up to this point, Datel has been very resistant to discovery requests regarding that code. If it turns out to be true, then they'll likely lose handily. It won't set a bad DMCA precedent, but it's a shame for consumers.
Wired is hosting a copy of Microsoft's motion to compel discovery, which contains all kinds of neat bits regarding the reversing (or lack thereof) of the handshake code in the peripherals:
http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2011/06/microsftdatelcounter.pdf
With any luck, this will turn out to be just noise and Datel will prevail on the DMCA claim fair and square.
It's worth noting, regardless of the merits of this particular case, that the restraining order HAS NOT BEEN GRANTED.
Sony applied for a TRO, but there has been no ruling. So don't be fooled by the "Sony Gets Restraining Order" headline. They simply filed a request.
Vernor has a huge effect on MDY v Blizzard, actually.
Since the meat of their (er, my) copyright defense hinged on section 117 of the Copyright Act: one cannot infringe copyright in a piece of software by copying it to RAM if that copy is an essential step in using the software. This applies to an "owner of a copy", just like section 109 with regards to selling.
However, Vernor's precedent will probably mean that WoW customers do not own their copies of the game and thus are not protected by section 117. This is deeply troubling for any integration with shrink-wrap software, as it means the developers of the software can turn add-on developers into copyright infringers with the stroke of a pen.
Just, you know, saying.
Copyright should protect those guys, not hurt them.
It's just another sign of how badly out of sync copyright law and technology are. The original purpose of the Copyright Act is a distant memory at this point: companies use it to prop up all kinds of bad business (and game) models. There's always a copy somewhere and, more importantly, you don't need to show damages.
That's the real scary part. Blizzard doesn't need to show that Glider or the SC2 radar or any of those products hurt them. Amend the EULA, file paperwork, seek huge statutory damages.
It's particularly obvious in the SC2 radar because the tools are all open source: Blizzard is using the Copyright Act to *prevent* the free flow of perfectly legal (sans EULA, authored by Blizzard) creative work. It doesn't get any more disgusting than that.
Disclaimer: I am very biased in this case, as easily noted by my name.