Legal Analysis Critical of Blizzard v Bnetd

anewsome writes "As reported previously several times, Blizzard has sent a cease and desist letter to the ISP of bnetd (which develops an open source Battle.net emulator). Lawmeme.org (from the Yale Law School) has published a long piece with lots of background and legal analysis on the case. Conclusion: Blizzard has an uphill legal battle."

Comments

not really.

[mikeee]

If they allowed bnetd to pass-through authentication to battle.net, they might have a better point. They've specifically ruled that out. (Presumably because their crypto is lousy.)

And it isn't the bnetd group that even enabled Warcraft III support.

I don't blame them...

[alexhmit01]

This is one of the most anticipated titles in years. I've been looking foward to WC3 since WC2, considering what a jump WC2 was over WC1.

All these people playing the beta versions cracked are still going to buy the game? Who knows.

I feel that Blizzard, by providing great games for years, has earned the right to not have people floating around cracked copies of their games. We all wants WC3. I'm willing to wait.

If that means harassing some people with questionable lawsuits to stall for their software, so be it. I feel that we worry too much on Slashdot about legalisms and not enough about common decency.

If you love Blizzard games, show some respect and let them launch their games as they desire. They haven't disappointed yet.

Realize that the early demos of Star Craft were seen as WC in space and were hated. Blizzard rewrote the game in the next year and put out a game that people loved.

Had Warez kiddies put out those early Star Craft demos, then when the game was released it might have bombed because people had played a crappy game with the same name a year earlier.

Ripping off a company that puts out products you love is poor form.

Alex

Re:I don't blame them...

[The Darkness]

I feel that Blizzard, by providing great games for years, has earned the right to not have people floating around cracked copies of their games. We all wants WC3. I'm willing to wait.

So how, exactly, will shutting down the main bnetd site keep cracked copies of their games from being distributed? I seem to recall that there are many no-cd cracks (even some that let you play on battle.net) for Diablo II and its expansion pack.

If that means harassing some people with questionable lawsuits to stall for their software, so be it. I feel that we worry too much on Slashdot about legalisms and not enough about common decency.

Common decency should apply to Blizzard also. Is it considered common decency to threaten loyal gamers who created a tool so they could play without connecting to the cheater-ridden, laggy, and resetting battle.net?

Besides, do you really think that all of the beta testers who already have bnetd are going to go play it on battle.net? They already have it! Maybe Blizzard should have contacted the authors of bnetd and said "Hey, here's how you can detect the WC3 beta, can you have the server pop up a request to go play on battle.net?" or even have it not allow WC3beta to play. Sure, it wouldn't catch everyone, but at least they would have a reminder that they are supposed to be testing the game on battle.net so Blizzard can improve the game. Maybe even the warez kiddies who copied/cracked it would load battle.net a little more and give them a scaled test..

Ripping off a company that puts out products you love is poor form.

Pissing off most of your existing customer base by getting rid of a useful and legal product because of a product you haven't released yet (and those pissed off customers won't buy) is in poor form.

Of course, this argument implies that the same people griping about how horrible shutting down bnetd is now won't turn around and say "Ohh! New Shiny!" when WC3 is actually released..

Re:I don't blame them...

[Phanatic1a]

If you love Blizzard games, show some respect and let them launch their games as they desire.

This is so backwards.

I like Blizzard games. I've purchased and enjoyed them since Warcraft.

But I love my rights. I love your rights, and those of the bnetd developers. Anyone who values Blizzard software more than our rights under the law and constitution of the US, or your respective country, has some seriously skewed priorities.

You're saying that if I like Blizzard's games, I should be willing to forgive a little legal threatening, some innocent trampling of my rights.

I say the reverse: Because of Blizzard's actions here, I won't be buying any more of their games, enojoyable though they may be.

wrong

[poemofatic]

If bnetd did not exist, then the hacked copies of WC3b would not be playable - bottom line

--online that is. And if RW-CD burners didn't exist, then WC3b couldn't be burned to them and passed around. And if phones didn't exist, people couldn't call up their friends and tell them how to get the w3cb...

bnetd wasn't created to hack wc3b, and that's not it's primary purpose or use, so your point is moot.

Re:Old Fashioned Right and Wrong ?

[Kwil]

All the talk about DMCA and fair use and everything else is a very good thing but i think missing a very important point, what happened to old fashioned right and wrong ?

Nobody's ignoring right and wrong..
The bnetd folks haven't done anything wrong.
The beta-cheaters are doing wrong with their use of bnetd.
Blizzard is doing wrong to bnetd because of the beta-cheaters.

What we need is some way to cut out the middle-man. Let Blizzard go after the beta-cheaters directly and not stomp on the bnetd guys. After all, they're about as much at fault for this as a crowbar manufacturer is for someone breaking into a house using that crowbar.

is it right to take someone elses property and use it without paying ?
Absolutely not. But is bnetd taking Battle.net away from Blizzard? The only thing they could be argued taking is a number of the users, and last I checked, people are nobody's property.

is it right to ignore licenses and other agreements because you 'dont care for them' ?
Absolutely not. They should never be ignored. However ignorance, lack of a real 'agreement', and civil disobedience are all different things. The key to remember is that if you engage in civil disobedience, you'd best be prepared for the consequences, and if you think there's a lack of a real agreement, you'd best be prepared to defend that position.

Is it right to damage a companies profits and endanger jobs for people ? people with families to feed ?
Morality has no connection to a company's profits. I as a human being have absolutely no responsibility to support a company. In fact, if a company is engaged in immoral acts, it is my moral obligation to help stop them, and the employees moral obligation to help stop the practices, or quit and help stop the company.

Is it right to defend anyone who comes along and finds a way around 'iritating things' like security?
Finding a way around security is not an immoral act, so yes, it is right to defend a moral person who has done so - especially if they are then made targets of immoral acts, such as the harrassment, or suppression of expression.