Slashdot Mirror
Blizzard Stomps Bnetd in DMCA Case
base3 writes "The EFF reported that the Vivendi/Blizzard vs. the good guys case has been decided, and it doesn't look good. Some highlights from the ruling
are: A clickthrough EULA isn't unconscionable (and thus enforceable); Fair Use rights can be waived in a EULA; First Sale rights (!) can be waived in a EULA; The DMCA's interoperability provisions are not a defense. If this ruling is allowed to stand, it will allow one-sided EULAs to force the waiver of the rights of First Sale and Fair Use. This, combined with the Supreme Court's recent assent to perpetual copyright, a few decades at a time, will destroy any semblance of balance in U.S. copyright law. Fortunately, the EFF plans to appeal the ruling."
It's a press statement by Blizzard that says "Don't buy our products!".
Yay our favorite game company won!
Now the boycott on them can end! Enough of those pesky morals and ethics. I mean they make AWESOME video games. No one's gonna remember your sacrifice against a game company. So GAME ON!
WOOO HOOO!
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
The EFF reported that the Vivendi/Blizzard vs. the good guys case has been decided, and it doesn't look good.
Thanks for letting us know who the good guys are! I can never figure out who's right or wrong myself, and I like it when I can count on Slashdot telling me that.
Peoples rights more important than interest of greedy corporations.
God fucking damn it!
This is teh sucks.
"All your base are
Belong to us!"
Blizz with the blitz
Got the gamers in fits
Fair Use has been dissed
now the EULAs exist
Vivendi gets pissed
as STEAM clouds thier green visors
As VALVE holds the mod
community with incisors
The game won't come out
till legalistic advisors
come up with a way to please
the stockholder misers!
Sarcasm. Most /.'ers would know that a program ending in a "d" would be a daemon. inted, xinetd, httpd, dhcpcd, etc.
Contract: CDMusic Publishing, Inc. (hereafter referred to as the "licenser") licenses this CD to be used as a coffee coaster by the buyer (hereafter referred to as the "licensee"). The licensee may not listen to, alter, copy, resell, give away, or otherwise do anything with this recording. The CD belongs solely to the copyright holder, and the licensee waives all rights to listen to this music, including on a player manufactured by CDMusic Publishing, Inc., using headphones manufactured by CDMusic Publishing, Inc. at a volume that would not allow non-licensees to hear the music. All other use, asides the already stated "Coffee Coaster" clause, is prohibited by this contract.
Sign: ____________________________
Initial: ________
Date: ___________
- Yolego
Cooooooool...
One less person to add to server load on the opening day of WoW. Your loss buddy.
No, it's against most EULAs.
Also, I notice your username is technix4beos, so a word of warning. If you would look at the BeOS EULA, you would see that you are forbidden from publicly mentioning any opinion of the software or the company, Be Incorporated. Since all that's left of Be is a couple lawyers looking for something to sue, I would not recommend mentioning BeOS on the web, even though..
Hold on, there's someone at the door.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? I mean, the law cuts both ways. We don't have one law for the rich, and another for the poor. Or one for corporations, and another for lowly netizens.
So if their End-User-License-Agreement is binding, even though we can't see it until after purchase, and even though we can't return our software for a refund (at our own travel/time expense) once we've seen the EULA...
Then why can't we have our own license agreement? Call it a Citizen's Vendor Purchase Agreement.
My CVPA states that:
1) Any agreements presented after money has changed hands are non-binding.
2) Any agreements without my signature on them are non-binding.
3) Any attempt to revoke my rights to use the software I've purchased, including making backups, storage format conversion, reverse engineering, re-use in other software applications, or whatever else anyone can think of, will require the producer [software production house] to repurchase the software from me at the full price I paid PLUS reasonable expenses for my time and energy. I bill my time at $200 per hour, or portion thereof.
4) As compensation for purchasing and using producer's software product, producer will pay me $1,000,000 in U.S. dollars. After all, I am a legend in my own mind.
My CVPA agreement is readily available to any vendor or producer who can be bothered to read it. It's on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of The Leopard".
Bring a torch. The display department is in the cellar. The lights are out. Come to think of it, so are the stairs...
If the copyright holder of windows forbids it..
It might be stupid, but they could do it legally...
It really isn't anything to worry about. Remember? Developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers....Woooooooooo!
It would be cool if it didn't suck.