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?
... demonstrate that damage was done? I mean, what you're talking about here is someone who's hacked an embeded device (basicly).
Does the DMCA ban reverse engineering as well? Is that technicaly constitutional? It seems that there's a lot of questions about this case that need answering. But the bottom line is that Sony isn't loosing any money from this site. None of these files are of any use if you don't HAVE an Abio right?
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
I know I'll get flamed for this, but Sony did have a right to respond to the fact that he was distributing backup copies of their software.
The DMCA bs was probably just because they were already pissed. I absolutely agree that the DMCA is wrong but this guy didn't help his cause by putting copyrighted software on his site.
You can't scream about unfair laws and then break the ones that are fair.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
I was expecting more of an automated form letter, so I was pleasantly surprised by the personalization of the complaint letter. Are we gun shy now and flinching whenever someone challenges their "property" rights? Obviously their attitude of "please don't be curious about things we own" backed by the DMCA smells like rotten fruit, but I'd rather see them hand pick their targets and send friendly "We're Out to Get You" letters rather than putting on the gorilla suit and squishing everything in sight. Until the world discovers a better way to handle "intellectual property" what more can we expect from large companies like Sony?
A steaming cup of soykaf would be real wiz right now.
You know, there are some things that will someday seem obvious to any reasonably person as completely wrong and nuts, that at the times seemed completely rational. Racism, slavery, and the inferior status of women were all once taken mostly for granted by all except a few, but now are considered generally indefensible, at least in theory.
Someday, the true may be said of this idea: that corporate ownership of intellectual property takes priority over folk and grassroots enthusiasms (particularly nonfraudulent and not-for-profit ones); that the owners of popular culture enjoy the benefits of the ubiquity of that culture, a culture which has in some sense colonized our subconscious (I have dreams with Bugs Bunny and the Enterprise in it - but if I depicted one of my own dreams publicly, I'd risk a lawsuit) but refuse to allow that ubiquity when it doesn't serve them.
Unfortunate, there is no indication that the increasingly global plutocracy is going to become reasonable any time in the near future. But I still hold out hope. What would it take for that to happen?
The site owner's logic seems to be, "OK, I'm violating Sony copyrights, but by doing so I'm helping them sell hardware, so it's in their own interest to overlook my violation." He's obviously ignorant of a basic fact of copyright law: if you own a copyright, you must enforce it, or risk losing it. This was true long before the DMCA came along.
Sony might seem to be less enlightened than hacker-friendly outfits like TiVO and Lego. But these companies have merely refrained from prosecuting people who reversed-engineered their systems without trying to rip off software or content. That's not a "prosecute or lose it" issue. If you started distributing modified TiVO or Lego Mindstorms software, they'd be on you in a flash.
I read the letter.
It seems very clear that sony is only trying to prevent this guy from
a) Distributing software that sony definately has the copyright on
and
b) Telling people how to break sony's copy protection mechanisms to get such software.
They have no problem with him writing his own aibo software... only with him stealing theirs.
Now.. their use of the anti-circumvention stuff might be a stretch.... but this is a lot less draconian than many things we've seen.
They also go into great detail to explain exactly what it is that bothers them, and exactly why (as opposed to some companies who simply make vague threats)
Close, but no cigar.
Patent law was originally intended to promote progress in the sciences, which in modern terms translates to technological innovation.
Copyright law was originally intended to promote progress in the arts, which in modern terms translates to good entertainment.
Copyright law's got nothing to do with innovation, never has. Why it got applied to binary numbers meant to express a simple technological function with no human-readable content whatever, I'll never understand...
(Before the twentieth century, every copyrightable item could be processed by an unaided normal human. We have moved well beyond that: why we stick with the antiquated notion of copyright, I'm not sure.)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
I was actually pleasantly surprised at the friendliness of the letter. Sony took the care to know pretty much research exactly what the situation is and went so far as provide the URLs of the files they find offensive. You would never see that much attention from M$ or FOX. But I agree that they should follow the LEGO model and even take an active part in the development of the AIBO community.
Copyright law was originally intended to promote progress in the arts, which in modern terms translates to good entertainment.
You think a novelist or an artist can't be innovative?
Anyway, this is a gross misrepresentation of the meaning of "the arts." If that was the case, they would have only applied it to works of fiction. In such formal speech, "the arts" is used in the root sense of productive skills, not merely entertainment, which is why you see a title like "The Art of Computer Programming."
Also, when it was settled that copyright could be applied to software, the justification was clearly to reward progress/innovation in software development.
Let me say that again. Even the site's maintainer admits that Sony was within their rights to ask the software be pulled.
The fellow freely admits that he is in violation of copyright by providing copies of someone else's files without permission.And this rates the big, nasty, ominous headline, "Sony Uses DMCA to Shut Down AIBO Hack Site"...why? It's a "Your Rights Online" issue? What about Sony's rights online?
Even if the DMCA did not exist, Sony would still be asking that the files be removed. For that matter, the DMCA itself is only incidental to this issue, and barely even mentioned in passing--even if it did not exist, those files still contain material that belongs to Sony, and Sony would still be asking that they be taken down!
Yes, you can boo and hiss and moan about how unfair it all is, and what a mean nasty company Sony is, and maybe even cry boycott for all the good it'll do. But in the end, Sony has the right to ask that these files be taken down.
I've got 50 Karma, do your worst.
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
Stifling innovation is exactly what copyright and other intellectual property holders want: the legal wherewithal to stifle their competitor's innovation. When consumers, small business people, hackers, tinkerers, and artists show up at Congress with briefcases full of cash and limos full of interns, perhaps we can expect some change.
And I'm a little disappointed by the attitude that Sony should just be nice to its fans. Any law that relies on the kindness, or even the self interest, of the party that can enforce it to be a fair law, is one messed up law.