Slashdot Mirror


EFF Sues Apple Over BluWiki Legal Threats

Hugh Pickens writes "The Electronic Frontier Foundation has filed suit against Apple to defend the First Amendment rights of BluWiki, a noncommercial, public Internet 'wiki' site operated by OdioWorks. Last year, BluWiki users began a discussion about making some Apple iPods and iPhones interoperate with software other than Apple's iTunes. Apple lawyers demanded removal of the content (pdf) sending a letter to OdioWorks, alleging that the discussions constituted copyright infringement and a violation of the DMCA's prohibition on circumventing copy protection measures. Fearing legal action by Apple, OdioWorks took down the discussions from the BluWiki site but has now filed a lawsuit to vindicate its right to restore those discussions (pdf) and seeking a declaratory judgment that the discussions do not violate any of the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions, and do not infringe any copyrights owned by Apple. 'I take the free speech rights of BluWiki users seriously,' said Sam Odio, owner of OdioWorks. 'Companies like Apple should not be able to censor online discussions by making baseless legal threats against services like BluWiki that host the discussions.'" Random BedHead Ed adds ZDNet quotes EFF's Fred von Lohmann, who says that this is an issue of censorship. 'Wikis and other community sites are home to many vibrant discussions among hobbyists and tinkerers. It's legal to engage in reverse engineering in order to create a competing product, it's legal to talk about reverse engineering, and it's legal for a public wiki to host those discussions.'"

13 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. w00t for the EFF by Toy+G · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They keep doing very useful (and thankless) work.

    --
    -- Let's go Viridian.
    1. Re:w00t for the EFF by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:w00t for the EFF by nomadic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They keep doing very useful (and thankless) work.

      Thankless? Everyone here (and there are a few hundred thousand) bend over backwards to extoll the virtues of the EFF (and overlook its flaws). They are especially well-funded for a single-issue legal advocacy group, and their members are quoted in the press constantly.

      How is that "thankless"? I do not think that word means what you think it does.

  2. Re:!streissandeffect by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is a story regarding the countersuit to an Apple DMCA takedown notice. The EFF want publicity for this case.

    The streisand effect would relate to apple's attempt to supress a few people talking about this on some forum and to shut the forum down, and now a lot more people are aware of the topic, the forum, and are talking about it.

  3. Re:Chicken by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Chickenshit?

    Oh, you mean "Not willing to go to court with Apple and possibly lose his business in damages."

    --
    If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
  4. Re:What's the Story by Anita+Coney · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You accuse the EFF as having a "strong bias... to selectively use facts for propaganda." You provide a link. But that link does not support your accusation at all. Would you like to clarify? Thanks!

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
  5. Re:First Amendment by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's what you get when you create laws that make information illegal. Censorship is nothing but just that: Outlawing certain information, or the spreading thereof.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  6. Re:Why do these idiots keep buying iPods by Nursie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Seriously, there's no "Linux compatible" label on their products, so why the fuck would they buy it and THEN complain?"

    There's no linux compatible sticker on anything much.

    An iPod without the managing capacities of iTunes makes no sense.

    Only if you're an idiot. Some of us can use these things called file systems to hold and manipulate files. They've been around a while, surprised you've never heard of them.

    They should be buying a mass-storage MP3 player which requires no special software.

    Like an iPod? They don't require special software, Apple just deliberately make it difficult to use with other software.

    In conclusion, fuck off retard.

  7. Re:Why do these idiots keep buying iPods by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Learn to comprehend what's going on. They're not saying it's Apple's fault for not making the iPod compatible, they're saying Apple can't attempt to stop them from doing that work themselves.

    It's entirely reasonable for Apple to say "We're not going to support that", but when they say "We're not going to support that and we'll sue you if you try to make it work", we have a fucking problem.

    --
    "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  8. Re:For Apple to claim copyright... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a shame that someone can sue someone else and ruin that person just on legal fee's. I am pretty sure the gov't does not provide free council to people in civil suits. It's a major flaw in our countries legal system.

    And you've just outlined the entire MPAA/RIAA prosecution strategy to boot...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  9. Re:Don't toast bread with a hammer by idontgno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, there are many perspectives on this. Yours advocates what I've always called "pragmatic", which boils down to (using your words) "path of least resistance" while accomplishing the desired affect. In many arenas, I'm like that too.

    Others want the iPod (why? I dunno. It's spiffy and has neato features, and don't underestimate the power of "cool" and technofetishism.) But they don't want to be locked into iTunes. So, they find ways to overcome Apple's artificial monopoly-enforcement tool. I admire the tenacity, and wish them the best.

    Me? I don't buy Apple stuff, not merely to avoid their lock-in traps, but as an actual statement. They get no money from me as long as they continue to use the courts and their own internal censorship systems (thread suppression on Apple fora) as their way of enforcing their vision of the world on their customers. Respect first sale and the customer's inherent right of use, and we can do business, Apple.

    But that's just me.

    Besides, I'm so old and crusty that I don't even bother with those new-fangled digital audio doohickeys. Now get offa my lawn!

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  10. Re:First Amendment Apple better KNOCK this by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is it so hard for some people to believe that Apple isn't this wonderful non-profit business with only intentions of making the world better? They are a for profit business, like the rest of them, with profit as the bottom line. They sell products to make money. That is all. Some people like their products better than others. But don't equate the products they sell with how they run their corporation.

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  11. Re:First Amendment Apple better KNOCK this by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What I don't get is how the RDF has been so successful at making folks think Apple is better than MSFT, when it comes to freedom. I'm probably going get flamed for this, but what the hell, let us be honest here. Apple LOVES DRM, just like MSFT, Apple LOVES vendor lock in, just like MSFT. If they switched positions tomorrow Apple would be just as nasty when it comes to anti competitive practices as MSFT ever was when Darth Gates was running it(Damn I miss him. The monkey is like a bad Dilbert joke) and any attempt by anybody to go around their locks, even as we saw here to allow interoperability, will get their lawyers falling out of the sky on them.

    So I honestly don't get it. The way you hear Apple fanboys talking you'd think Jobs is sitting in some office with his bare feet up tinkering these new toys by hand, when in reality Apple is nothing but a "Mini MSFT" that doesn't have a bumbling marketing monkey screwing with the line. But of course when Steve retires, well I'm sure they'll get their very own Ballmer. if they like Apple because they are shiny, or they think the brushed metal is cool,fine. But please quit trying to make it sound like Apple is this nice hippie company in California. They haven't been that since the Woz quit decades ago. They are just MSFT on a smaller scale, that's all.

    They are just lucky that they still have Darth Jobs to wield the dark side of the force for them. All we MSFT users have is a really fat stormtrooper that couldn't hit the broad side of popular with a blaster rifle.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.