Slashdot Mirror
Sony Uses DMCA To Shut Down Aibo Hack Site
Therlin writes: "Victor Matsuda, Vice President of Sony's Entertain Robot America (makers of AIBO), sent a letter to Aibopet.com citing the Digital
Mellennium Copyright Act. You can read the letter here. Aibopet is the website of an AIBO owner who enjoys researching AIBO. He also provides free software programs to improve and add features to the robots." I bet Sony won't increase their Aibo sales this way -- don't they like fanatical customers?
.
Anyways, here's the problem with the whole issue:
(i) the contents of your site contain Sony copyrighted software which you are
copying and distributing in violation of Sony's rights; -- That sounds fair to me. He shouldn't be violating any copyrighting anything. Shut him down until he complies.
(ii) your site provides the means to
circumvent the copy protection protocol of Sony's AIBO(tm) Memory Stick(tm) to allow access
to Sony AIBO-ware software; -- I have mixed views about if this is right or wrong, but this issue doesn't pertain to the DMCAA (according to the letter).
(iii) you site promotes the distribution of your original
software such as "Disco AIBO", "AIBO Scope", "Bender AIBO", etc. which appear to have
been created by copying and decrypting Sony's software. -- It is my opinion that (a) he has the right to 'fairly use' the code as long as he does it personally, (b) Sony doesn't know that the programs were created by copying and decrypting the software. Sony would have a hard time supporting this argument in court. The Aibo isn't *that* complicated that it couldn't be easily reverse engineered.
However,
your site still contains information providing the means to circumvent AIBO-ware's copy
protection protocol constituting a violation of the anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital
Mellennium Copyright Act. -- Ouch. I tell you how to build an atomic bomb, do I go to jail? I teach your karate... do I get in trouble when you beat somebody up? I teach you how to fly a plane. Do I get in trouble when...? You get my point. I disagree with this entire line of B.S.. Of course, IANAL, but my armchair law experience tells me that O.J. is guilty and this wouldn't stand up.
Hopefully, the isp won't force him to shut down and he will continue to provide Aibo users an experience. I'll be sitting here at my computer offering my opinion to the /. masses the next time there is an Aibo story. ...even if they don't ask.
Keeping
While Sony's letter did invoke the DMCA in regards to instructions on circumventing copy protection, most of the files that were requested to be removed were due to standard copyright law. If the author performed edits on Sony's binaries, and redistributed them, then that is a pretty blatent copyright violation. (Not positive that's what he did, but it sounds that way from the letter.) If he published only binary patches, I think he'd be in the clear on copyright law, and probably be safe from the DMCA if he didn't say how to install the patches.
On the other hand, I don't blame him for saying "screw it." Sony ought to lighten up and figure out how to support fans like this while maintaining their intellectual property rights.
My concern here is control: I should be able to do what I want with the things that I own. I do not believe that corporations should dictate the terms on which I use products I rightfully own.
Note the "rightfully own" part. Aibo hacks are (generally) only useful to Aibo owners. People who paid Sony money. We're not talking about hacks that allow people to steal from Sony by making illegal copies. We're talking about hacks that allow people to do something different with property they own. There are ways Sony can work this out gracefully. If Sony chooses not to, I will choose avoid buying their products.
This is the letter that will be going out on Monday morning:
To: Victor Matsuda
Vice President
SONY
Sony Electronics Inc.
Entertainment Robot America
6701 Center Drive West, Suite 640, Los Angeles, California 90045
From:
Re: Sony's response to www.aibopet.com
Greetings!
I am deeply saddened by Sony's predatory and short-sighted response to www.aibopet.com. As a professional programmer, I appreciate Sony's concern about its intellectual property. I am not an advocate of piracy or the theft of intellectual property. Your efforts to shutdown www.aibopet.com misunderstand the desires and interests of consumers. Aibo, as a robot dog, is something that, realistically, will only appeal to a small segment of the population -- a segment with both the means to purchase an Aibo, and an interest in gadgets. Here is (was) a site dedicated to enabling intrepid Aibo owners to try new out things, to play with their gadget. The software provided on the Aibo site was only useful for Aibo owners.
Sony's actions seem to be rooted in the notion that corporations should have the right to control how their products are used. As a consumer, I resent that notion. I have been very pleased with the Sony products I have bought, but actions like this make me wonder when Sony will be trying to control what I watch on my Sony WEGA television, which disks I play on my Sony 200 CD changer, or what programs I run on my Sony Vaio notebook. (I have at least $2000 of Sony equipment in my house.) I love gadgets. Before I buy a new gadget, I go online to how hackable it is. Hacking with the gadget is more than half the fun. Sony's response to www.aibopet.com guarantees that I - one of the rich geeks most likely to spring for your products - will not buy an Aibo. Sony's response will also make me consider very carefully whether to buy other Sony products in the future, including Sony's entertainment offerings.
Please reconsider your response to www.aibopet.com. Perhaps Sony could host the files, and thereby guarantee that only registered Aibo owners can download them. There are ways of working this out that do not necessitate restricting what the rightful owners of Sony products can do. Of course, this assumes that Sony wants to work things out. Perhaps Sony is only interested in shutting www.aibopet.com down, in which case, I will no longer be interest in buying Sony products.
Thank you for your time; I look forward to your response.
Fair use cannot be used as a defense for unauthorized _distribution_ of copyrighted material.
What is using video clips from a movie in a review except unauthorized distribution? The "fair use" exemption does include distribution under certain circumstances.
But I agree, no court in the USA would find this to be fair use. I don't think they'd ever support distribution in whole for works longer than a few lines. I still think that this fits the intended purpose of fair use, and this is unethical exploitation of a technicality, just as when certain governments and cults have used copyright to prevent secret documents from being distributed rather than to secure profit from the distribution.