Slashdot Mirror
Sony Sues Rootkit Maker
flyboy974 writes "Sony BMG Music Entertainment is suing the company that developed anti-piracy software for its CDs, claiming the technology was defective and cost the record company millions of dollars to settle consumer complaints and government investigations. The software in question is the MediaMax CD protection system, widely derided as a rootkit. Sony BMG is seeking to recover some $12 million in damages from the Phoenix-based technology company, according to court papers filed July 3."
The rootkit software was developed by First 4 Internet (now called Fortium Technologies). I suppose that an inability to sue straight can now be added to Sony BMG's portfolio of stupidity and arrogance. I hope SunnComm (now called The Amergence Group), as despicable as its own efforts were, totally owns Sony BMG.
With all these name changes, I wonder when Macrovision is going to change theirs?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write technology blogs.
Being able to pass the blame to someone else is priceless.
Seems to me like the responsibility for the functioning of a product should fall upon the distributor. Of course, you could ask if Sony is suing more for the money or as a PR measure to try to shrug off some of the blame for the whole debacle.
I'd be prepared to put money on Sony losing this case. I'm sure we've all seen this sort of thing before. Media Max will have warned Sony that the approach had problems, they will have a mail chain demonstrating that, but Sony's management will have bullishly insisted on the security features it offered while ignoring or not bothering to understand the warnings it contained about the risks. What are the chances even their own technical advisors internally warned against it?
Watching this will be like watching a celebrity deathmatch between Kim Jong Il & George W Bush.
You're hoping there's some way both will lose.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
The enemy of our enemy is still our enemy. In this case let them fight it out, and hopefully in the future all parties involved (content producers, technology developers, etc) will be too scared of financial damages to do something this stupid again.
This is actually a very good thing, because no-one involved will be immune to the consequences.
Dan East
Better known as 318230.
To bad they can't sue the guys who made AACS (since they're part of the consortium). I wonder if they'll be able to sue the people who developed BD+, once that gets owned.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
In a recent development the lawyers of Sony were bewildered. None of the documents they had on their computers relating to the contract and negotiations with MediaMax could be found in their computers. The lawyes were muttering, "cant believe it. I know I saved those emails and pdfs right in the hard disk. Where the hell could they be hiding?".
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I fully believe Sony knew what they were getting in to with this company. Sony also knew that if anything went wrong (like it did), they'd be able to easily sue this company which is a fraction of it's size.
Sony isn't earning any points back with me on this one..
I want both Sony and MediaMax to suffer greatly. (It's ok for Sony to survive imho, but MediaMax should probably die and have its fields salted.)
But isn't this a bit like a bank robber who shoots a cop suing Smith and Wesson? E.g., it sounds like Sony knew (or should have known) exactly what it was putting on their CDs.
All those landmines I buried in my front lawn made me look like a total psychopath when they blew up all those postal carriers, girl scouts, and neighborhood cats. Apparently, I can restore my status as a fine upstanding member of the community by simply suing the manufacturer of said landmines!
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
New York-based Sony BMG, a joint venture of Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG, declined to elaborate on the suit. Sony BMG is home to names such as Bruce Springsteen, Carrie Underwood and Modest Mouse.
Modest Mouse
Worms. vs Birds
Self pity me, it's so pitiful
You can see that birds and worms don't get along
Self-righteous me, it's so wrong and
You can see that we don't have to get along
Self pity me, it's so pitifull
You can see that birds and worms do not agree
And we will crawl
(Will crawl)
Big apple, new Yorik, undig it, something's unrotting in Edenmark.
Will the real victims here (the customers) see this extra cash?
The Sony Corporation
Making cash off of their customer misfortunes since 1946
Yet another great example of a Product with DRM being Defective by Design! Join the movement: Defective By Design
Thomas A. Knight
Author of The Time Weaver
...that they do not warrant nor guarantee this software to be suitable for any function or use, especially for that which it was designed? That they agree to indemnify (love that word, it means you can't sue or hold responsible) the seller or maker of the software for any reason at all?
Let me be the first to say that this is completely stupid. Nobody forced Sony to put that software on the CDs, and I wouldn't doubt that Sony knew exactly what they were doing when they put that software on the CDs. If they didn't, well then, it's their own fault. Having them pass the blame on to the company that made this software just make me hate Sony even more. Sony has done so many braindead things in the past couple of years that it's no wonder that Nintendo stock rose above theirs, if only for a short while. From rootkits, to $600+ consoles, to sueing the people who sold them the rootkit, I just can't imagine what they'll do next.
Disclaimer: I'm not saying I hate them because they released a $600+ console ( + because it's even more expensive once you buy a game and a second controller) but what I'm saying is that it's a really boneheaded idea, and I don't know how they ever thought it would have mass appeal, no matter how good the graphics are.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Step 5. Make sure your Killzone 2 E3 trailer very closely matches the 2005 CGI trailer.
In all seriousness though, if you pay someone to write you some software and it fucks up, whose fault is it? Theirs for not testing it, or yours for not testing it again?
Maybe we'll see another article in a couple of days:
Rootkit Maker sues QA company...
Summation 2
"Section 938.334 Sub W.
By agreeing to use this product to proctect your music CD's from piracy you also agree to hold us immune from any lawsuits, incurred directly or indirectly, due to your customers not liking this product."
oops... Guess they should read those EULA's VERY CAREFULLY...
At least that is what these companies would say to us...
":{ Grr...
--- Relax, that mass muderer is just trying to reduce our carbon footprint, one fetus at a time...
I think Sony has a case there. It was supposed to be a rootkit, and rootkits are usually impossible to find. Some "hackers" found it, so it obviously has to be defective. If it was working as advised, nobody would've found it.
Wait, did anyone here think Sony complained that it was a rootkit, and that this was the defect? Get real.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
[/joke]
The creator of this post (Jacob Smith) hereby releases it, and all of his other posts, into the public domain.
A better analogy would be: if you pay a hitman to rid you of your nemesis, and he gets caught, who will go to jail? The answer: both you and the hitman...
Just a question I've been wanting to ask for a while. How much has this whole rootkit debacle caused you to avoid Sony products?
Shortly after it happened, I promised myself I would buy nothing with a Sony brand for at least a year. To my knowledge, I complied with that (though they do have tentacles in more things than you think, so who knows). I figured I need to end the boycott after a year, or else there wouldn't be any incentive for them to change anyway. I still haven't bought anything major from Sony -- the very name SONY screams to me "infected millions of PCs with rootkits, and tries to take away my Freedom!" But enough time has passed that I would probably consider buying a Sony product if it really were the right one for me.
How about you?
I believe the formula works like this:
Sony releases DRM protected discs = -5,000 pts.
DRM Discs contain rootkit = -10,000 pts.
Sony denies any wrongdoing = -60,000 pts.
Sony realizes mistake = +100 pts.
Sony releases patch = +1,000 pts.
Public realizes cure worse than the disease = -5,000 pts.
Sony recalls discs = +10,000 pts.
Sony releases BluRay and PS3 = 0 pts.
Sony sues DRM Manufacturer = + 1pts.
So, in total, Sony is 68,899 points in the hole. I think its safe to say they're still pariahs here.
I know nothing of the DRM sales pitch made to Sony, but if I was making the sale, it would go like this:
When you are selling a product with a significant technical "issues", the standard practice is to use a technique I call "sell high". With this method, the salesperson seeks out the highest level "decision makers" they can find -- making an effort to go over the head of anyone with a technical background. The sales team typically consists of an MBA-type male who comes across as a golfing buddy to the decision making group. The other person is usually an attractive woman who demonstrates the product in such a way that the suits are watching her instead of thinking. The sales pitch is based entirely on things the suits understand -- the problem, the need for a solution, the cost, and perceived benefits. Dirty little details like technical issues are left for the "little people" to figure out later. It's not all that hard to get a roomful of MBAs to cheerleading the "project". Even better if the whole thing is instigated by a CEO or senior manager who has issued some kind of directive to "do something" about piracy. The ultimate weapon of such a sales force is the golf trip. By the time the group reaches the 19th hole, it's a done deal.
At my old company, we had a level of management that made decisions and commitments without consideration of technical matters. We referred to them as "the golfers". The products and projects we got stuck with were referred to as "golfware".
My guess is that by the time anyone at Sony with a technical background was involved, they complained. But it was too late to convince the MBA cheerleaders that the technology they just bought was worse than worthless.
I'd be prepared to put money that Sony knows it will lose, but doesn't care. If this action is for PR purposes -- and I assume it is -- Sony will accomplish its purpose regardless of the outcome.
Major lawsuits are big news. The convoluted and complicated resolutions of those lawsuits are much less interesting for the general public. For example, everyone knows that Microsoft has been tied up in various litigation in various countries for the past decade, but the average citizen has no idea how these cases have turned out.
The end result is that the average electronics consumer will learn from the media that:
1 - Sony produced bad technology that hurt customers
2 - Sony is suing the bad people responsible for this
3 - The court's decision on the matter is hidden in a 20 word article on page 47 of the weekend edition.
The Sony I used to love is dead. Management changes have turned it from a pioneering company into a slogging lumbering hulk that only wants more money, not customers' loyalty.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Wait, so Sony contracts with a company to put rootkits on its cd's. Then when Sony gets caught in a public relations backlash, they blame the company that supplied the rootkit? That is like a drug user blaming his drug dealer for selling him the drugs the cops caught him with. Corporate responsibility just died.
Only one slight nitpick - hampering DRM isn't about reducing the effectiveness of copyright. Its about preventing distributors from overstepping the rights they have with copyright, and taking rights away from recipients of the distributed materials that copyright says they are allowed to have.
I really doubt it will help Sony's PR any to do this. Those that actually know about the rootkits will know that Sony is at fault. Those that don't will remain clueless. A rootkit maker will either be sued out of existence or tied up in court. Finally, it will probably make many think twice about doing business with Sony in the future, since nobody wants to end up as their new scapegoat.
Sounds like a good plan to me, take careful aim at that foot, Sony!
The results of the class action lawsuit against Sony was that you could either get $7.50 and download an album or download 3 albums. Like every class action lawsuit I've ever been a part of from Sony all the way back to when Kodak brought out their own version of a Polaroid-style camera, the only people that ever benefit are the lawyers. The rest of us just get coupons for more crap from the company that caused the problem in the first place.
If there is any justice then Sony will just get a coupon for more rootkits from the company and not any actual money.
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
Of course they are the least likely company to do something like this again. After this lawsuit anyone that Sony tries to contract to write the software again would be a fool to take the job. Do you really want to go contract work for someone who has a history of suing its contractors?
I think the PR DOES hurt in this case. They should be trying to let people forget that they ever distributed root kits at all
- You do not have to buy music from the iTunes store in order to listen to it on your iPod. If you rip the music into iTunes from your CD, it will be in the AAC/MP4 standard sans DRM.
- iTunes does not require an iPod or the iTunes store in order to be a useful application. It is just a media jukebox that can rip and burn CDs. However, it can also purchase music from the iTunes store and copy files onto an iPod.
When are people going to stop deriding iTunes and the iPod on these grounds?~ I am logged on, therefore I am.
I got my first iPod for Christmas '06, so I've been playing with iTunes for about 7 months now. I concur with everything riceboy50 just said, and it was exactly what I was thinking as I read networkBoy's post.
I dislike iTunes for other reasons. It seems to be a resource-hog. It installs background processes that are always running. Its yet another program that adds "qttask" to my startup programs. It's covered with annoying ads, and makes poor use of screen real-estate.
That being said, I'd like to paraphrase Winston Churchill. iTunes is the worst iPod/podcatcher/jukebox software for Windows except all the others that I've tried. I would actually be most grateful if someone could point me to an open-source alternative that actually works (unlike Floola).
>I hope SunnComm (now called The Amergence Group), as despicable as its own efforts were, totally owns Sony BMG.
In dealing with product liability claims, which this is, you have the right, generally, to go after anyone in the chain of commerce you want. If they think someone else is at fault, they can cross-complain. This provision is good consumer protection.
For example, let's say you bought one of the famous inferno model Mr. Coffee makers at Sears. You take it home, take it out of the box, plug it in, make coffee, and go off to the movies. The Mr. Coffee malfunctions and burns up your kitchen and maybe the rest of your house. You can make a claim for damages against Sears, where you bought it. Their defense is that they "bought it in a box and sold it in a box," made no modifications, and so have no liability. It is up to them, however, to tender the claim to Mr. Coffee. They aren't off the hook until Mr. Coffee steps in.
This can be really important if you are dealing with an overseas manufacturer. You go to Sears and buy an electronic device manufactured by a South Korean company using parts from Malaysia, Taiwan, and Bangladesh. One of those parts malfs and burns down your house. Who do you want to go after? You go to Sears and make it their problem.
In the case of Sony, the same rules apply. Now whether they knew or should have known that the product was defective is a matter for the courts to decide, but the basic rules still apply.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
Really it will come down the exact wording of the contracts. Either Sony did or didn't get what they asked for, and they did or didn't give the appropriate sign-off.
I you want to make that distinction, go ahead. They're both paying money into the same pockets, however.
Personally, I don't currently intend to ever purchase anything from Sony again. I suppose that they *could* change my mind, but not without understanding just how evil it is to put rootkits in people's computers. After realizing that, then they'd need to decide to provide genuine, as opposed to symbolic, recompense. Then they'd have to actually do the deed. That would bring them back close to neutral. At that point I'd start considering them again. Then I'd reject them because I don't like DRM. Currently I reject them for being treacherous backstabbing sleaze mongers who make equipment that can't be trusted because they either think rootkits are good or have neither morals nor ethics.
Once they recover their status to just being DRM vendors, then I can consider them. They'll still probably lose out against the competition, because I don't like DRM and won't pay extra to support it, but they'll have a possibility of a sale if they provide superior equipment at a good price, and if non-DRM software isn't discriminated against. But they'll need to prove that latter.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
IANAL, either, but if I recall correctly, the DMCA doesn't have a fair-use exemption. So, sure, you can make all the fair-use copies you want from any of your copy-protected CDs or DVDs. It's just that, while exercising your fair-use rights, you'd be circumventing DRM, which is illegal under the DMCA.
Which is why those who support that portion of the DMCA are enemies of freedom.
So to speak.