Slashdot Mirror
Judge Grudgingly Awards $3.6 Million In DRM Circumvention Case
Fluffeh writes "The case involves an online game, MapleStory, and some people who set up an alternate server, UMaple, allowing users to play the game with the official game client, but without logging into the official MapleStory servers. In this case, the people behind UMaple apparently ignored the lawsuit, leading to a default judgment. Although annoyed with MapleStory (The Judge knocked down a request for $68,764.23 — in profits made by UMaple — down to just $398.98), the law states a minimum of $200 per infringement. Multiply that by 17,938 users of UMaple... and you get $3.6 million. In fact, it sounds like the court would very much like to decrease the amount, but notes that 'nevertheless, the court is powerless to deviate from the DMCA's statutory minimum.' Eric Goldman also has some further op-ed and information regarding the case and judgement."
UMaple users can play MapleStory (using the MapleStory client software) without ever touching MapleStory's servers. UMaple then solicits "donations" that lead to enhanced privileges in the UMaple environment.
In this case some penalty does seem justified
UMaple was after all making money from software written by MapleStory, without their permission
I don't see how they work out that it is 17938 infringements when they only set up one server, so they have only infringed once.
Court messed up pretty majorly here, statutory damages is per infringing work, not per infrigement.
I vaguely recall that someone had developed a program that mimicked battle.net, so people could host their own Starcraft game servers. Blizzard eventually sued and shut down the program.
It sounds like the facts are similar, except that in the MapleStory case, the people were making money whereas the battle.net clone was just some developer who released his stuff open-source.
Anyone with a better memory than me?
We don't live in Shouldland.
but i see people this every week, all week at all the local flea markets - along with music CDs, etc. - and people are buying them! just walk around an urban area's sidewalks...
... do this with all cheats (i.e. banks) we'd all be rich.
Where is the DRM circumvention. Did UMaple modify the original commercial clients? If all they did was set up a server that somebody accessed with a client, how is that circumventing DRM. It might be using the software for a purpose other than intended, but, my wife who teaches kindergarten takes old CDs and the kids make mosaics from them. That to is using it for a purpose other than intended.
I'm not saying what they did was legal, but it seems that a different statute than DRM circumvention would be at hand.
IANAL-- but why not just say that the server itself was one infringement and fine them $200?
In fact, it sounds like the court would very much like to decrease the amount, but notes that 'nevertheless, the court is powerless to deviate from the DMCA's statutory minimum.'
The court should have ruled that a $3.6 million award would violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition against "excessive fines," and that this portion of the DMCA was therefore unconstitutional as applied to this particular case. (It's not that unusual for courts to decide that while a law is constitutional "on its face," it is unconstitutional "as applied."
The server is not the issue here, or at least not the main one.
The part that is landing UMaple with the $3.6 million fine is that in order to make the official MapleStory client look to UMaple's server instead they had to write a little launcher app (UMaple Launcher) which would presumably do something like an in-memory edit to change the server address the client used. Possibly with a modification to some sort of handshaking protocol.
It's the technological equivalent of ignoring a 'do not enter' sign, rather than the actual bypassing of security, but sadly it still seems to count.
This launcher is the part that is being used by the 17K users, and so where the court is getting the 17K counts of infringement from.
The only thing I remember Maple Story for was how they blocked any browser that wasn't Internet Explorer from even viewing their website a few years ago. Screw them.
But he chose not to.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Let this be a lesson: If you're sued, even if you think the lawsuit is the dumbest thing on Earth, you should still show up to defend yourself. If you don't, things like this happen.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
DMCA isn't what is most fucked up here. The real problem is for default judgment to automatically mean total lack of judgment. If both parties don't show up, then for some reason the judge is required to ignore how the facts compare to the law. Justice isn't even half-heartedly attempted.
I suspect this ridiculous process is one of those things that is long-established by judicial tradition but has never been penned by any legislator, so the people have have no say in the matter.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Instead, Plaintiff merely submitted 252 raw pages of documents obtained through discovery without so much as a summary of the information contained in those documents or an explanation to the Court how any of the line items contained therein directly relate to Kumar’s UMaple activities.
Seems to me that's the real reason the judge wasn't feeling like awarding any more damages, not some kind of protest against the DMCA or statutory damages.
I'd tell a UDP joke, but you may not get it. I'd tell a TCP joke, but I'd have to keep repeating it until you got it.
A properly formed jury could have nullified the law and saved everyone a huge amount of grief here.
Another example of computer laws/licensing not making sense in the real world.
>> "UMaple was after all making money from software written by MapleStory, without their permission."
If UMaple were making or selling car parts they would be OK. Autozone or NAPA sell parts not manufactured by the car maker. Instead of donations they can outright sell parts that service or enhance a car built by a 3rd party. They would be a similar relationship to the customer - they are offering an alternative to using factory part (or server in this case). Or perhaps UMaple decided to operate a towing/repair service - now they are actually servicing the car build by a 3rd party and soliciting even more money from the customer of a 3rd party car manufacturer.
if setting up alternate servers is now illegal, here's what else is possible:
smartphone makers sue VOIP app makers
ISPs sue alternate DNS providers and proxy service providers
car manufacturers sue third-party, after-market, parts manufacturers
hp sues 'hp compatible ink' suppliers/manufacturers
cats and dogs living together!
end of the world!
We do not recognize DMCA, so we ignore them.
Good luck collecting.
I know you're trying to use an extreme/absurd example here, but it brings up a point I've always found interesting about DMCA.
Other than indirectly through patents (and that's an important exception), there doesn't seem to be any law, DMCA included, which recognizes that a protocol or a DRM scheme can be "owned" by anyone. DMCA's language is always about who holds the copyright of the DRMed work, not who invented the DRM scheme. That party is whose authorization is always needed.
Even if someone did "own" HTTP, then visiting your web site with a browser would require your authorization according to DCMA, not HTTP's inventor's authorization. This has various consequences for DCMA which still remain unexploited (e.g. "Sony, you manufactured a TV which cracks the HDCP which protects my copyrighted video.").
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
the court is powerless to deviate from the DMCA's statutory minimum
If a judge said this, he should be removed from office and forced to re-take law school. The court can overturn ANY law for ANY reason. If some state makes a law that says you can't carry change in your pocket on Sunday, and someone is arrested and tried for violating it, a jury can find him "not guilty" despite it being PROVEN he broke the law, and overturn the law.
This is the DMCA we're talking about, therefore it concerns law, not just a suit. Therefore, a jury needs to be involved. If a jury is not allowed to be involved, then we have become a police state (although I'm sure everyone's already aware that the US already is).
What if UMaple takes a page out of Sony's playbook and pays its debt with in-game items? I don't see how that's any less reasonable than providing free music to people you've rootkitted.
He knocked it from 68,764.23 to 398.98.. but then it's back up to $3.6 million?
He could've found that the law, as applied in this case, was unconstitutional.
On what grounds?
That by setting a "minimum amount" that is far in excess of the actual damages (or even 3x actual damages) and it is far in excess of a "reasonable minimum" that is common in civil cases, the excess amounts to a "fine" and as such it's subject to the Constitutional prohibition against unreasonable fines.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
this. No matter how trivial the application, you _always_ create a corporation, and have the corporation hold copyright and liability. Then when big bad company comes-a-suin' they are coming after the corporation, and not you personally. Make yourself an employee, pay yourself a token salary, file your annual reports, etc.
--- Generation X: The first generation to have SIG lines inferior to their parents... ---
they should just give up all the users, who should have known full well that this setup wasn't legal. they were all using infringing derivative works. i assume they kept all the payment records.
...