Who Owns Software?

SeeSp0tRun writes to remind us of Blizzard's lawsuit against MDY Industries over the Glider cheat. It seems that Blizzard is pushing it even further. They're trying out the legal theory that a software creator retains complete control over how a program is used, meaning that anyone who uses it in a different way could be found guilty of copyright infringement, at $750 a pop. The EFF and Public Knowledge are among the organizations trying to assure that the court doesn't set a really bad precedent here.

Comments

Obvious answer!

[neokushan]

I do the second uTorrent is finished with it.

Re:Obvious answer!

[PopeRatzo]

I agree with the GGP, too. I'm so sick of the games software vendors are playing with licenses, EULAs, phoning home and other DRM, I find it much easier and more efficient to just steal the stuff.

There are a surprising number of cases in my computing life where I've bought a legit license to software, but used the cracked version just because it doesn't fuck with me. In most cases, I don't have anything against the developer, so I don't want to steal from them, but I do not want to be fucked with and pay hundreds of dollars for the privilege.

Since I'm well aware that I'm not exceptional, I have to assume other people do the same thing.

Re:Obvious answer!

[ColdWetDog]

I'll just join the chorus - it is an issue with many vendors - not only with games. I tried to do a cross platform switch with Adobe Premiere Pro. I've had Premiere since 1.0 and have upgraded three times. They wanted every single serial number since, oh 2003 or so.

After rummaging around, I managed to find the two previous upgrades, but not the original one. They wouldn't do it.

So now I use Final Cut.

You've just screwed yourself out of future upgrade money.

Strong work, Adobe.

How it's used?

[CannonballHead]

They want to keep the rights to how it is used? Hm. Does that mean they are responsible for how it is used, then? If someone uses it "wrong" and "hurts" me, does that mean I can sue the developer, since he is the one in charge of how it is used?

Re:How it's used?

[fahrbot-bot]

If someone uses it "wrong" and "hurts" me, does that mean I can sue the developer, since he is the one in charge of how it is used?

More to the point. If someone uses it "right" and hurts someone...

Re:How it's used?

[Anonymous Coward]

If we're to pay them for using it in ways we're not supposed to, then can we get payed every time their software does not work exactly the way its supposed to and crashes or messes up my system?

Re:How it's used?

[Kjella]

Any restrictions would be contractual obligations, which have nothing to do with legal obligations. The contract doesn't regulate illegal use since it's per definition already illegal. Besides, what kind of logic is that? The government dictates a maximum speed limit. So if I crash while under the speed limit, can I sue the government because they're responsible for how I drive?

Re:How it's used?

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I still allowed to spin the CD on my finger when I'm bored?

Re:How it's used?

[sm62704]

Easy solution: You sell the software and I'll use it any way I damned well please, just as copyright law allows. If Blizzard gets away with this Congress needs to change copyright law.

The only problem with the changing copyright law thing is that the corporate controlled Congress will change it the wrong fucking way like they almost always do.

How I would change copyright:

• Book, music, movie, and image copyrights: 20 years, ten year extension
  
• Software copyrights: Five years, must include the source code, five year extension on old parts of the work
  
• Out of print works go directly into the public domain (none of this Disney bullshit of taking a movie off the market for seven years)
  
• Any private, noncommercial use is statutorily considered non-infringing, including distribution
  
• No copyright can be held by a corporation. All copyrights are held by the works author or authors
  
• Anyone caught abusing copyright like the record companies do and like Blizzard is doing here loses all copyrights they hold, and may not hold copyright for another five years
  
• No work is copyrighted unless application is filed along with two copies in the Library of Congress
  
• Cowboy Neal is in the public domain

Re:How it's used?

[cHALiTO]

You've both got it all wrong. The problem is not the government saying how we can drive our own cars. That is analogue to the government telling how we can use copyrighted stuff, which it does (i.e.: DON'T REDISTRIBUTE IT WITHOUT PERMISSION).

The problem here is that blizzard sells you the product, *then* wants to tell you how to use it.

A more fitting analogy would be if Ford sold you a car, then told you "but you can't use it on highways, interstates or parking lots, and you must park it in a covered garage", which is BS, 'cause once you bought it it's YOUR car, and you can do whatever you want with it, as long as it doesn't break the law (over which Ford isn't supposed to have any say...).

The worst they can do is refuse to service you or void your warranty if it was explicitly specified before you bought the car, but they can't tell you what to do with your own stuff.

Now, if they're Renting you a car, or leasing it, that's another thing altogether, but then they should clearly advertise it as a rent, and not as a product you buy out of the shelf.

And even when renting, that implies a whole lot of responsibilities from the vendor..

This is all fucked up big time.

Good luck with that

[Mr. Underbridge]

I'm no lawyer, but even I recognize that what they're talking about is simply a matter of contract law. You have your EULA, enforce it. It's not a matter of copyright law, no matter how convenient that would make things for them thanks to the insane penalties that accompany it.

Wow!

[gstoddart]

So, could they say no fat people not wearing pants can use their software? How about nobody under the age of 30? Black people? White people? Brown people?

At what point, does their assertion they can control "how it is used" completely break down and be outside of the realm of copyright law, beyond what you can do in an EULA, and just plain silly.

I would say they've basically gone into the plain silly category. But, who knows. Courts have upheld the damnedest things.

Cheers

Re:Wow!

[gEvil (beta)]

So, could they say no fat people not wearing pants can use their software?

That would be sheer lunacy! They'd cut out nearly their entire customer base!