Comments on: Blizzard wins lawsuit on video game hacking
Players do not have the right to reverse-engineer the company's games to improve their playability, a court rules.
Most Popular
Latest tech news headlines
- AT&T resumes online iPhone sales in NY
December 28, 2009 2:39 PM PST
- Quark Promote lets novices make promo materials
December 28, 2009 1:39 PM PST
- Consumer groups urge block of Google-AdMob deal
December 28, 2009 12:45 PM PST
- See all headlines
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
- Markets
Related quotes
No mention of illegal copies or anything. Just shutting down innovation that they cannot charge you a fee for enjoying.
-R
Software is licensed instead of purchased because it enables the publishers to undermine a lot of rights someone would have if they purchased it. It is really a BS tactic, but it works.
If that fails they can always fall back on DMCA.
I too think DMCA has its place, but that place is not so software vendors and content providers can dictate what purchasers of content can and can't do with it. That is what Fair Use and other exemptions to copyright law are for. If the protections were only means of tracking down the source of infringments and bypassing those mechanisms were the thing that was illegal, I don't think there would be a problem.
No mention of illegal copies or anything. Just shutting down innovation that they cannot charge you a fee for enjoying.
-R
Software is licensed instead of purchased because it enables the publishers to undermine a lot of rights someone would have if they purchased it. It is really a BS tactic, but it works.
If that fails they can always fall back on DMCA.
I too think DMCA has its place, but that place is not so software vendors and content providers can dictate what purchasers of content can and can't do with it. That is what Fair Use and other exemptions to copyright law are for. If the protections were only means of tracking down the source of infringments and bypassing those mechanisms were the thing that was illegal, I don't think there would be a problem.
The only way to convince companies to not use click-wrap agreements to protect their trade secrets, as Blizzard has done, is for consumers to vote with their wallets and not buy these products and/or services.
The only way to convince companies to not use click-wrap agreements to protect their trade secrets, as Blizzard has done, is for consumers to vote with their wallets and not buy these products and/or services.
That being said, it seems to me this ruling is tantamount to my buying a Ford Mustang, and then being prevented from installing a "better" after-market part on it....by Ford Motor Company! Obviously, Ford can't do that and to the extent they can prevail upon you to buy only Ford-approved products for your Mustang, they can excersize void-warranty provisions and not much more.
Intellectual property isn't by itself, being properly defined by contract law rulings in that there is no distinction (it seems to me) being made as to whether it "is something" (like a photo or a painting) or "does something" (like an executable computer program). Are the courts supressing free-enterprise product improvement with these rulings? Sure they are. Why can't I improve a computer program (or buy an improvement "plug-in" for it) like I can my automobile or many other items I purchase that "do something" rather than "are something?"
In my opinion, this is a case of "when the law doesn't work!" And, it's a reminder to never let lawyers write the law.
Then again, I'm a Corvette guy. :-)
If we were talking about a product that costs as much as a Mustang, that would be a real problem. But we're talking about something that costs less than a tank of gas for that Mustang. I agree, product cost shouldn't be a factor - but don't try to deny that it is.
as owner or the car though you may void warranty in the
process.
The thing is that you are buying a manufactured good as
opposed to a video game which is an intellectual/media good.
You can not make a backup of your car to disk, copy it to a
friend or xerox/scan the car to send to others for less than the
price you paid for the car. The only way to pirate a car is to
physically steal the car.
For your car analogy to be right, you would need to lease the car
and complain that you cannot modify the car under lease.
That being said, it seems to me this ruling is tantamount to my buying a Ford Mustang, and then being prevented from installing a "better" after-market part on it....by Ford Motor Company! Obviously, Ford can't do that and to the extent they can prevail upon you to buy only Ford-approved products for your Mustang, they can excersize void-warranty provisions and not much more.
Intellectual property isn't by itself, being properly defined by contract law rulings in that there is no distinction (it seems to me) being made as to whether it "is something" (like a photo or a painting) or "does something" (like an executable computer program). Are the courts supressing free-enterprise product improvement with these rulings? Sure they are. Why can't I improve a computer program (or buy an improvement "plug-in" for it) like I can my automobile or many other items I purchase that "do something" rather than "are something?"
In my opinion, this is a case of "when the law doesn't work!" And, it's a reminder to never let lawyers write the law.
Then again, I'm a Corvette guy. :-)
If we were talking about a product that costs as much as a Mustang, that would be a real problem. But we're talking about something that costs less than a tank of gas for that Mustang. I agree, product cost shouldn't be a factor - but don't try to deny that it is.
as owner or the car though you may void warranty in the
process.
The thing is that you are buying a manufactured good as
opposed to a video game which is an intellectual/media good.
You can not make a backup of your car to disk, copy it to a
friend or xerox/scan the car to send to others for less than the
price you paid for the car. The only way to pirate a car is to
physically steal the car.
For your car analogy to be right, you would need to lease the car
and complain that you cannot modify the car under lease.
As for the cheating argument, there is nothing worse than an effective cheat to ruin an online game, but if you look at what is out there today, most of the anti-cheat software is written by 3rd party companies and not by Blizzard, EA, Ubi, etc.
So what if someone came out with a 99% effective cheat detection tool and Blizzard didn't like it? They would get sued, and forced to sell the program to Blizzard as part of a civil "settlement". OK, now if getting all paranoid.....is that the Feds knocking at my door....I better close down Kazaa.
As for the cheating argument, there is nothing worse than an effective cheat to ruin an online game, but if you look at what is out there today, most of the anti-cheat software is written by 3rd party companies and not by Blizzard, EA, Ubi, etc.
So what if someone came out with a 99% effective cheat detection tool and Blizzard didn't like it? They would get sued, and forced to sell the program to Blizzard as part of a civil "settlement". OK, now if getting all paranoid.....is that the Feds knocking at my door....I better close down Kazaa.
I believe (personal opinion based on observation of similar situations) that it's far more likely that they were trying to start their own network for unauthorized copies of Blizzard software.
What good is it to download WoW on eDonkey if you can't use it?
I believe (personal opinion based on observation of similar situations) that it's far more likely that they were trying to start their own network for unauthorized copies of Blizzard software.
What good is it to download WoW on eDonkey if you can't use it?
I am sure there are hundreds of programmers across the USA and thousands across the world who have hacked their own software titles to make them run better and such.
I am sure there are hundreds of programmers across the USA and thousands across the world who have hacked their own software titles to make them run better and such.
- by kb_z December 5, 2008 10:21 AM PST
- the thing is... if they want no piracy, then why they have an open page, to download 'trials' which are actually 100% functional games?
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(51 Comments)this is a hard hit for many of the private servers, which are going bye-bye...