Slashdot Mirror

What is with Viviendi? For the longest time, it seemed like they had the gamer close to heart. Then they started throwing every kind of copy protection on their products. I quit giving them cash when they started picking on F/OSS projects. Last time I checked BnetD's website (a few weeks ago), it pulled up Blizzard's battle.net site. Thought I had a typo and found the real site. I've been giving them hell ever since. With any luck, Blizzard will be bought-up or crushed in a few years.
I may speak with my wallet, but a cable modem and a good FTP server speaks louder...

It's a foregone conclusion that Dreamcast fans will hack the protocols and design their own servers. The question is how long it'll be before the cease-and-desist orders start flying.

Still boycotting, still haven't bought War3, still have no plans to buy world of warcraft. Did we forget already?

Keep your repetitive games that haven't changed since 94 (or whenever Warcraft 2 was released), you fucks. You'll get no money from me until you jump off the bandwagon of sue-happy corporate morons with no concern for civil rights whatsoever.

Okay, so the Linux NWN client won't do cutscenes. Big deal. Very few mods use cutscenes anyway, and the only thing I remember from the cutscenes in the official campaign is that the playback was quite choppy. =)

But the developer section is huge news. Yeah, the obscure file formats Bioware has developed have been reverse-engineered, but this stuff is still a little bit spotty here and there so official documentation is definitely a nice thing.

Yeah, the toolkit won't be ported officially, but this file format news and the developer support in general is good for people like OpenKnights who work on Linux/MacOSX tools.

Could be worse. Could be so much worse.

well.. I'm not sure you could currently say bnetd is very succesful. There haven't been new releases on their site since last YEAR (funny, "NEW" has been next to the link since a while, and never have I seen a file following it)

Do you WANT to be succesfull enough to get killed? (or at least badly stunned)

Also remember that they weren't against Open Source, they were specifically against it being used to allow pirated copies of their games to be played. While we're remembering stuff, let's also remember that it was Vivendi (Blizzard's parent company) that filed the complaint. Finally, let's also remember that it was not a DMCA case, it was plain old copyright.

And just to add to that, let's also remember that it IS a DMCA case. There is no Blizzard code in BnetD (No copyright infringement). The only thing Vivendi had left was the DMCA, and they DID trot it out (At least enough to frighten people who don't have their own lawyers on retainer).

Boycotting Blizzard is probably the least effective way of getting your disapproval across to them. Exactly how are they supposed to know why you didn't buy the game? A drop off in sales will likely be explained by sagging economy and other factors affecting every single game company on the planet. Besides, it's Vivendi you're after. Send THEM a letter. Don't be a tard and give Blizzard reason to stop making those good games you like.

Boycotting someone is more than just refusing to do business with them. At the very least, you should send them an angry letter telling them what you think of them, that you'll never do business with them again, and that you'll do everything in your power to keep other people from doing business with them in the future. The drop in sales is just the last exclamation point on your protest. Without it, you're just an angry nut-job who is still bending over for them and buying their games.

As for being "a tard", just because they make games (good or otherwise) is not enough reason for me to give up my rights to play a game I shelled out a part of my life for. I've got friends who like to play StarCraft, but none of us like playing on BattleNet. All the trolls, cheaters, crappy connections, and general pain associated with playing it on a Blizzard-blessed server are too much. It'd be like trying to play against the trolls on Slashdot.

So we run BnetD, and we don't play WarCraft 3.

I.E. they got the wrong people, but they're forging ahead anyway. It's like going after a gun manufacturer because somebody bought one of their shotguns and sawed the barrel to an illegal length. Now does it seem like a pretty scummy move?

Even if they went after the 'right' people, in my opinion they'd be attacking the same principles that made the computer game business possible. If everybody in computers were as ham-handed as they were most of them never would have gotten a start in the field.

Finally, let's also remember that it was not a DMCA case, it was plain old copyright

They have since amended their claims to include DMCA references.

Nope, they'd go BNETD style. Never underestimate the power of a junkie who needs a fix.

I like this idea. So we can emulate .Mac servers, BNETD servers, advertising servers, Cydoor servers, and even :CueCat servers. Setting up independent servers has the obvious advantage of being independent from an ultimate authority, decentralizing the service and making it more useful to the Internet community. So I ask Slashdot, what commericial or otherwise propertiary server will be reverse-engineered and cloned next? My vote is in for an Oscar/TOC server so one could use AOL-IM to communicate with one's LAN.

> Well, Blizzard hasn't sued anybody attempting to
> do stuff they really shouldn't be doing,

And who the hell tells people what they should and shuldn't be doing? Blizzard? Uh, no... So you're wrong.

Not that I expect [the release of a video game server daemon independently developed through reverse engineering] to ever happen for a sufficiently complex game

Then what's bnetd? It's a program licensed under GNU GPL that lets anybody set up a competitor to Battle.net service. However, assuming enforceability of shrinkwrap EULAs, the Blizzard EULA specifically prohibits users from running or connecting to bnetd-type services.

Never mind the Tetris mark, watch out for Blizzard/Vivendi who HATE anything that makes their game more fun for people.

According to bnetd.org, the complaint still hasn't been settled. Therefore, I think it's fair to say, that the slashdot party line is still: hate.

bnetd

boycottblizzard

>> It doesn't fall under the DMCA at all

Agreed. You, however, seem to believe that that matters, that that simple fact could keep Microsoft from invoking the DMCA to crush the presentation, and that's dangerously naive. The Bnetd case was about reimplementing a network protocol by reverse engineering, for compatibility purposes. It doesn't fall under the DMCA at all either. That didn't stop vivendi from wielding the DMCA to force their compliance from somebody they didn't like.

The simple fact is, no matter how right you are on the matter that none of this is within the legal scope of the DMCA (and you ARE right), it just doesn't make a lick of difference. Being right doesn't mean you win. Being rich does.

...as their claim is that the BnetD developers actually *copied* portions of Blizzard's code rather than reverse engineering and rewriting it. They have dropped the DMCA component of the complaint, the latest (amended) version of which is here.

IANAL, but it seems that honest to goodness reverse engineering is still legally safe, for the time being.

Sigh... to be expected... I guess the Slashdot editors are only interested in preserving their rights when it doesn't involve any action on their part.

I thought it was already out? Certainly is one of the most downloaded files on dalnet. Oh wait....

Anyway to quote
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.

Dont worry slashdot, I wont BUY the game, Ill get a copy and support people who write software to interoperate with
Blizzards

I thought it was already out? Certainly is one of the most downloaded files on dalnet. Oh wait....

Anyway to quote
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.

Dont worry slashdot, I wont BUY the game, Ill get a copy and support people who write software to interoperate with
Blizzards

I thought it was already out? Certainly is one of the most downloaded files on dalnet. Oh wait....

Anyway to quote
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.

Dont worry slashdot, I wont BUY the game, Ill get a copy and support people who write software to interoperate with
Blizzards

I thought it was already out? Certainly is one of the most downloaded files on dalnet. Oh wait....

Anyway to quote
Please consider the fact that Blizzard is suing people who write software to interoperate with theirs when deciding whether you want to purchase this game.

Dont worry slashdot, I wont BUY the game, Ill get a copy and support people who write software to interoperate with
Blizzards

If someone created attachments that worked with only Stanley hammers, then yes, Stanley will be able to prosecute that producer.

Huh? On what grounds? Lots of companies make accessories that only work with this or that brand of something.

As to your other example, Ford can certainly sue people for manufacturing after-market parts, if they own a patent on that part. Blizzard owns all the parts to their games, as well as Battle.net.

Well guess what? Blizzard doesn't have a patent on the Battle.net protocol. Maybe you should actually read the complaint against bnetd before spouting off.

Suppose some people decided to hire all of the actors in Attack of the Clones and made their own version of AotC, with the same scenes, same script, same story.

Using the same script would be a clear case of copyright infringement. A better analogy would be writing an all new script with a similar plot, then yes, Lucas would have no case.

Agreed. I wish I could find the actual ruling somewhere because the article is useless. It's worth mentioning that this case is very different from a typical EULA. With an online game, you are using a service provided by the company. That definitely requires accepting their terms of use, otherwise you are using their service without permission. I wouldn't call it an EULA though, but a service contract--like what you agree to when you sign up with an ISP.

This doesn't (or shouldn't) automatically imply that running stand-alone software you've already paid for is subject to an EULA. If the judge actually went so far as to say that, then he's insane. Do I need Ford's permission to drive my car just because they have a patent on the engine design? If I buy the game, but use it to connect to my own server (a la bnetd, then Mythic's service agreement is irrelevant.

After reading the First Amended Complaint, I see a wrinkle nobody mentioned before. EULA violation. According to this, the EULA states (in section 11) that if they agreed to the EULA, they are forbidden from emulating the networking features of the games in question.

Also, according to section 17, they claim code theft because the BnetD emulator copies the results of a bug in the username/password authentication portion of battle.net. Well.. depends on the bug, but that doesn't necessarily state that they copied code from battle.net. They may have simply copied the protocol. Anyway, how did they get access to that code? Seems fishy to me.

In the first Vivendi's amendment to the lawsuit, Vivendi claims that BNETD copied source code from Blizzard by examine the source code available at sourceforge. Well, who can say it is the reverse that happened? - http://www.bnetd.org/case_letters.php

Not only that, but if you read the legal complaint that Vivendi filed against them, Vivendi actually claims that the bnetd people used their code, illegally of course. Last time I knew, listening to client/server communication packets wasn't illegal, and it's a far cry from source code. Reverse engineering software is not illegal. It kinda sounds like Vivendi is grasping at straws with most of this stuff. Note the DMCA claims that were later dropped when they realized, "Oh yeah, I guess they didn't break any circumvention."

If you are serious about helping out. Try donating to either bnetd directly or make a donation to the EFF, which can hopefully be earmarked for the bnetd folks. This is how open source projects get defended, the same way they are created in the first place, the Community.

... dont... ...how bout instead of using frivolous lawsuits we tell em what we think of them the way the system wants us to... ... with our money... dont support them or those that support them... itll be hard sure but its also harder to watch hipocracy...

you say we should sue them frivolously and yet most of the people with the same opinion as that usually also cry foul when a company sues someone that we would like to support...

...so remember to think about the bigger consequences of what you propose before you try to represent an otherwise valid argument

Really?

Check your facts before you spout bullshit.

Yeah, they're so disbanded that they've just finished putting up a new website.

Idiot.

TheFrood

I agree. If AOL is responsible for what their users post, then BnetD is responsible for people taking their open source project and modifying it against the copyright of Blizzard. I actually don't think there's too much wrong with the DMCA, but several proposed amendments to it (I forget the one that's really out of line, that requires security measures on every piece of internet software) can be fairly out of whack.

Forced? No one forced anyone to do anything...

Incorrect. the bnetd and fsgs groups were forced to remove the results of their volunteer software projects from their websites.

Payment Information

A payment has been sent to bnetd-defense@bnetd.org.
You will receive an email receipt for this transaction shortly.
For details on your transaction, please contact bnetd-defense@bnetd.org.

Item Name: Bnetd Project Defense Fund
Item Number: Defense Fund

Rather than just talk about it, I have put my money where my mouth is on this issue, by donating to the cause. I encourage everyone else to do the same at this link.

The war3b only includes online play

check your facts.

Warcraft III will have single player mode. Look at the faq. Now it's possible (I don't have the beta) that single player mode was crippled to only test online play -- do you have the beta?

Kinda obviates your whole rant, no?

But the rant was wrong to start with, if you'd read my post. Just because something can be used to aid unauthorized copying doesn't mean it's illegal. That's why, if you'd bothered to read any of the bnetd maling lists, you'd know that the Blizzard people never once mentioned wc3b. That's because they know this is not a valid reason for shutting down the sight.

So the "bottom line" for you is something that lawyers at blizzard must have forgotten to bring up, eh?

Could it be that they understand the legal issues a bit better than you do? That my previous post was right?

Why don't you learn about the issue at hand before spouting your irrelevent and misinformed two cents.. oh right, this is slashdot.

heh.

• I'm making an assumption here, but I don't think the guys running the bnetd project don't have piles of money to take this thing to court

Not an un-nice double negative. Perhaps you could go over to bnetd.org and actually find out? I'll make the, er, assumption that you and most other Slashdotters are too lazy to even click a link, and that you need to be spoon fed the salient comments:

• "This site has been disabled as requested by Blizzard Entertainment and it will remain closed as we have no legal recourse other than to fight a long protracted lawsuit against a large corporation [...] We have no choice but to comply until we can get some legal counsel to fight them. We are very sorry for the inconvenience but there is nothing we can do at this point. If you know of any lawyers who would be willing to take this case on a pro-bono case, please forward their information to us"

Paste, from here

Ok not many of you may know, but I am the host and admin for the bnetd.org
server. I am also an ISP and the one who hosts the server here at no cost to
anyone. I also have been known from time to time to help with development and
ideas on the bnetd server, but I am not even close to one of the main
developers. I have also been know from time to time to hack on the web pages for
the site as well.

I have talked with the lawyers at EFF. They are interested in taking on the
case, both for us as a small local/rural ISP and to help defend the developers
as well. So for now the web site is sort of closed down to keep Vivendi/Blizzard
lawyers from suing us as a small ISP and to help prevent them from suing each of
the developers. They could still sue both of us, and say that they will at least
sue the developers and owners of the website (which I guess would techincally be
me personally).

I and I believe most of the developers plan on fighting this as much as we can
given the support that we are able to get from EFF and others. It remains to be
seen what kind of legal advice we get in the next few days and up comming week
as to when the site will return. The site was taken down in its current form by
concensus amoung all the developers that could be reached at the given time that
action was required. I, as an ISP, did not force anyone to do anything. As an
ISP I plan to fight this as much as I can, as a developer (the little developing
that I have done) plan to fight this as well.

I plan to fight this and return the site back to its "normal state" (whatever
that may be), it is just a question of when and how long at this point.

Vivendi/Blizzard's main complaint, as was voice to me in an hour long call with
them yelling and threating me, the ISP to hurry and take it down "why do you
need to wait and figure all this out?" was that the bnetd program/server does
not impliment the online CD-KEY checking and thus allowed pirate copies to play
online, and that the true battle.net server have this code as an anti-piracy
protection. Since bnetd doesn't have this feature, it was circumventing the
piracy/copy protection and thus was in violation of the DMCA. It was at this
point that Vivendi/Blizzard just wanted me, the ISP, to shut the whole site
down, not remove the offending files but shut the whole site down or risk having
them sue me along with the "owners" of bnetd.org. They were very unhappy that I
want to talk with a lawyer to see what my options were, and said if they didn't
hear back from me by the next day one way or they other they would start
proceedings to sue me and the "owners" of bnetd.org who were refusing to respond
to their messages. Now who they were contacting as the "owner" of bnetd.org is
beyond me, and the lawyers were unable to tell me who they tried to contact and
said "its beside the point anyway", which happens to seem to be their favorite
phrase.

If you want to support this fight, I suggest you email Blizzard and Vivendi
letting them know how displeased you are that they didn't even contact us first
or try to work anything out, but rather just hammered us with legal threats and
the DMCA. I also suggest that you get an EFF membership to help them fight cases
like this. If you want to donate to a defense fund for our court costs I would
assume that you could contact EFF and they could work something out.

If you have any other questions let me know. I will try to answer them as best I
can.

Tim Jung
System Admin
Internet Gateway Inc.

Subject: www.bnetd.org

and

Subject: Site UPDATE

The short version:

They had and have nothing to do with the WC3 Beta, the EFF is taking thier case with the ISP and they need donations.

Be sure to check back to the site for when the donations link becomes active.

Subject: www.bnetd.org

and

Subject: Site UPDATE

The short version:

They had and have nothing to do with the WC3 Beta, the EFF is taking thier case with the ISP and they need donations.

Be sure to check back to the site for when the donations link becomes active.

You can view the letter in its entirety here at Blizzard Takes Action to Protect.

"Although these programs might have been made with good intentions, they directly promote software piracy..."

"...thereby eliminating Blizzard's ability to protect legitimate consumers..."

"we are well within our legal rights to protect our products from software piracy"

"In order for us to keep our proprietary CD-key algorithms secure, we cannot allow outside servers to query for the validity of CD keys."

"Unfortunately, software pirates have spoiled this situation for hobbyists."

"We are constantly working to improve Battle.net, and we sincerely hope that one day, no one will see any reason to seek alternatives to Battle.net for playing Blizzard games.

Click here for the details. Was it this?