Ruling
I read an article on a ruling with far reaching implications. As part of the ruling the judge declared that as per the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) violating a EULA (End User License Agreement) also means violating the DMCA.
DMCA
The DMCA was established to make copying movies and songs illegal and enable law enforcement to have a leg to stand on in the courts against them. This in theory was a good idea, but in practice has been used in ways that was never intended by it's authors. All this is due to how it was written.
Intentions
When laws are written if there is any Grey areas within the wording it falls to the courts to determine what the writers intended. The problem is that intentions of the writers rarely come into play in these decisions. No instead politics and positioning play the key roles in deciding the judgments.
Behind the times
Twenty years ago computers were the size of rooms. They have progressed far faster than the laws that govern their use. With laws not keeping up with progression lawyers have used existing laws to bend the words to fit their needs. The judges must then decide if the law is in fact applicable.
Judges
Most judges are not young. Many who use computers only use them for the most basic of things. Word processing, spreadsheets, and the internet. Most do not understand how the data gets from one place to another. Most people do not understand the complexities of two computers sharing data. Yet we ask these same people who do not understand how these things work to determine the laws that govern them. This blows my mind. How can someone pass judgment on something when they do not understand the full story. That is something judges face on a day to day basis with more than just the electronics environment. They decide cases based on the facts given to them. They decide on the he said she said argument. I do not envy judges. They have a very difficult job that has far reaching implications at times.
Thoughts
I wrote this post in response to a recent decision of a judge that a EULA violation is not just a breach of contract making the license no longer valid (which would make sense, but he takes it further into the criminal), but a violation of the DCMA. Violations of the DCMA can result in fines of $150,000 per offense, and or jail time. This means if a company put in their EULA you may not write on pictures after you print them, and you do, then they can sue you and find you in breach of both the EULA and DCMA. This is absurd and down right wrong. My only hope is that the appeals court sees the light in this matter.
Quote from the article
Link
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/01/judges-ruling-that-wow-bot-violates-dmca-is-troubling.ars
I read an article on a ruling with far reaching implications. As part of the ruling the judge declared that as per the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) violating a EULA (End User License Agreement) also means violating the DMCA.
DMCA
The DMCA was established to make copying movies and songs illegal and enable law enforcement to have a leg to stand on in the courts against them. This in theory was a good idea, but in practice has been used in ways that was never intended by it's authors. All this is due to how it was written.
Intentions
When laws are written if there is any Grey areas within the wording it falls to the courts to determine what the writers intended. The problem is that intentions of the writers rarely come into play in these decisions. No instead politics and positioning play the key roles in deciding the judgments.
Behind the times
Twenty years ago computers were the size of rooms. They have progressed far faster than the laws that govern their use. With laws not keeping up with progression lawyers have used existing laws to bend the words to fit their needs. The judges must then decide if the law is in fact applicable.
Judges
Most judges are not young. Many who use computers only use them for the most basic of things. Word processing, spreadsheets, and the internet. Most do not understand how the data gets from one place to another. Most people do not understand the complexities of two computers sharing data. Yet we ask these same people who do not understand how these things work to determine the laws that govern them. This blows my mind. How can someone pass judgment on something when they do not understand the full story. That is something judges face on a day to day basis with more than just the electronics environment. They decide cases based on the facts given to them. They decide on the he said she said argument. I do not envy judges. They have a very difficult job that has far reaching implications at times.
Thoughts
I wrote this post in response to a recent decision of a judge that a EULA violation is not just a breach of contract making the license no longer valid (which would make sense, but he takes it further into the criminal), but a violation of the DCMA. Violations of the DCMA can result in fines of $150,000 per offense, and or jail time. This means if a company put in their EULA you may not write on pictures after you print them, and you do, then they can sue you and find you in breach of both the EULA and DCMA. This is absurd and down right wrong. My only hope is that the appeals court sees the light in this matter.
Quote from the article
"Judge Campbell's ruling seems clearly out of step with the stated purpose of the DMCA. When Congress passed the DMCA in 1998, it was concerned with the specter of mass file-sharing on the Internet. Yet in this case, there is no file-sharing in sight. Glider is designed to be used by legitimate Blizzard customers who not only paid for their copies of World of Warcraft, but pay a monthly fee for access to Blizzard's servers as well. Blizzard is using the DMCA not to stop illicit file sharing, but as an all-purpose tool to control their users' behavior."
Link
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/01/judges-ruling-that-wow-bot-violates-dmca-is-troubling.ars
No comments:
Post a Comment