heh. heh. welcome to the GPL. companies are basically arseholes who are out to make money and wouldnt compensate you the money unless you ordered em to. i recommend you just GPL it rathe4r than try and make money of it..it will get you nowhere. its best to work for a company and release GPLed software on the side. works nicely for everyone and thats what i do.
ssh 1.2.27 (patched) or 1.2.28...no other alternative has been that badly *thrashed* by everyone in sight over so many *years*. of course openssh is equally secure but there arent that many people hammering it yet.
unfortunately NT kernel programmers are hard to come by since the kernel is not open sourced and writing kernel modules is discouraged due to M$'s high pricing. you can try headhunting at micro$oft directly using one of their ex kernel guys but this will be $$$. of course, you can scrap the idea and simply write a usermode application which does it..winnt allows a non kernel subsystem to add calls to its ring 0 subsystem. see phrack magazine for sample code (they wanted to write a winnt rootkit but the principle is the same)...i *dislike* (well ok..*hate*..*loathe*) win9x/nt/2k by default anyway, so im sticking with unix kernel hacking.
try a decent modern trident SVGA card..most unixen support tridents since they were one of the few cards to come out first...although they may not go that high. alternatively try an old ATI Mach64..it does go to 1280 x 1024, 24bpp on my gateway. ive seen most OSen supporting em outta the box. Of course you can use any card that works with XFree is youre going to run XFree86 on those systems instead of the X server used by default.
yes. it becomes prior art since its in the public domain. of course the companies can always patent up the surrounding stuff or other applications of it...
nope. i do the same. never use preinstalled stuff - always customise it. Its good security and you also know how the machine is set up. theres always *something* those preinstalled OSes dont get right...and how do you really know how many patches are installed etc etc.
actually you can. some new compaqs have a soft bios -- the bios exists on a partition on the hard drive. format/repartition and reinstall the machine and voila - no bios. Also most home machines comes with win9x preinstalled and no install cd - win9x dies and you cant reinstall it.
isnt this what mosanto was planning for its bio engineered plants ? Dip the seeds in a chemical to flip the terminator gene to the on position and voila - no more fertile seeds which can germinate.
not the sprinkler system. the fire department responded to the fire which started inside the C90 and they put it out with dry extinguishers which wrecked it,.
nope. IBM CISC AS/400s cant run IBM RISC compiled AS/400 software. 32->64 is a helluva lot easier than converting instructions on the fly to a VLIW CPU.
nope. from what i gather this just goes to sleep and back up again at full speed with noops/hlt for power saving. variable speed asynchronous machines cant be handled by linux due to its bogomips setting..basically it loops when booting up and stores the cpu rating which it uses for timing. Linux cant handle asynchronous machine architectures yet (and indeed no solution was presented other than checking the do_hardware_timer() in the last kernmel discussion on the subject - check the mailing list - and this solutions was rejected since it was too costly in terms of cpu time). BTW, i'd love to know whether this chip can run the java VM at full CPU speed - i'd love to crunch my servlets on a non dedicated java vm emulating processor which apache runs x86 instructions as usual.
Actually debian wont install at all on certain types of hardware. I've never had a problem with installing slackware on a 386SX-16 with 4mb ram and a 40mb hdd using text mode custom slackware floppy install. however debian hamm installed ok on it, but newer debians refused to due to space limitations. This is silly - why the heck cant we select base install packages in debian ? i'd love to upgrade my machine with a newer debian but the installer is too automated. and dont get me started about the fact debian has dynamically linked every godammed binary they have in there. WTF do i need to have so many libraries for ?
Jon A. Baumgarten (pro hac vice admission to be applied for)
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
1233 20th Street, N.W., Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036-2396
(202) 416-6800 Telephone
(202) 416-6899 Facsimile
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.; PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION; METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC.; TRISTAR PICTURES, INC.; COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.; TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT CO., L.P.; DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.; AND TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SHAWN C. REIMERDES; ERIC CORLEY A/K/A "EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN"; AND ROMAN KAZAN,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
00 Civ. _____________
COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS GOVERNING CIRCUMVENTION OF COPYRIGHT PROTECTION SYSTEMS, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.
)
Plaintiffs Universal City Studios, Inc.; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc.; TriStar Pictures, Inc.; Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.; Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P.; Disney Enterprises, Inc.; and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation by their attorneys Proskauer Rose LLP, as and for their complaint, allege as follows:
Nature of the Claims
1. This is a Complaint for injunctive relief and for money damages and related relief against Shawn C. Reimerdes ("Reimerdes"), Eric Corley a/k/a "Emmanuel Goldstein" ("Corley") and Roman Kazan ("Kazan") (collectively, the "Defendants"), individuals responsible for proliferating a software device that unlawfully defeats the DVD copy protection and access control system -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- so that individuals can make, distribute, and/or otherwise electronically transmit or perform unauthorized copies of Plaintiffs' copyrighted motion pictures and other audiovisual works. The acts of the Defendants, which are described more fully below, violate the provisions of the United States Copyright Act governing circumvention of copyright protection systems, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.
The Parties
2. Plaintiff Universal City Studios, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
3. Plaintiff Paramount Pictures Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
4. Plaintiff Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
5. Plaintiff TriStar Pictures, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
6. Plaintiff Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
7. Plaintiff Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P. is a limited partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware.
8. Plaintiff Disney Enterprises, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
9. Plaintiff Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
10. Plaintiffs are the major motion picture studios in the United States. Each plaintiff is engaged in the business of producing, manufacturing, and/or distributing copyrightable and copyrighted material, including, specifically, motion pictures. Plaintiffs distribute motion pictures theatrically, via television broadcast, and on portable media such as videocassettes tapes and digital versatile discs ("DVDs") for distribution in the home video market. In the course of its business, each plaintiff or its predecessor in interest obtained ownership of the United States copyrights, the exclusive reproduction, adaptation, and/or distribution rights under United States copyrights, and/or the state statutory and common law rights, in various motion pictures embodied in such DVDs. Plaintiffs are the leading producers and distributors of motion pictures in DVD format in the United States, including such recent blockbusters as "Titanic" and "The Matrix," and approximately 4,000 titles have been released in the United States on DVD to date. Current industry estimates place DVD sales at over 1,000,000 units per week.
11. On information and belief, defendant Reimerdes either resides or has his principal place of business at 295 Greenwich St., New York, NY 10007 and/or 162-14 Cryders Lane, Whitestone, NY 11357. Defendant Reimerdes operates an Internet web site addressed as www.dvd-copy.com.
12. On information and belief, defendant Corley, who, on information and belief, uses the nom de net "Emmanuel Goldstein," either resides or has his principal place of business at 7Strong's Lane, Setauket, New York. Corley a/k/a Emmanual Goldstein operates an Internet web site at www.2600.com/news/1999/1112-files/.
13. On information and belief, defendant Kazan either resides or has his principal place of business at 16 E. 55th Street, New York, New York 10022. Defendant Kazan operates an Internet web site at www.krackdown.com/decss/.
Jurisdiction and Venue
14. The Court has jurisdiction of this action under 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq., 28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal question) and 1338(a) (copyright).
15. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants in that each Defendant either resides or has his principal place of business in the State of New York.
16. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. 1400(a) as (a) this is a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred, and/or (b) all of the defendants reside in the State of New York and this is a judicial district in which some of the defendants reside, and/or (c) this is a judicial district in which some defendants may be found, and there is no judicial district in which the action may otherwise be brought.
Background Facts
The DVD Technology
17. With the advent of the VCR and videocassette tapes, home viewing of motion pictures became a convenient, inexpensive way to enjoy motion pictures. DVDs are 5-inch-wide discs that hold full-length motion pictures, are the most current technological advancement for private home viewing of motion pictures. This technology significantly improves the clarity and the overall quality of the motion picture when played on a television screen or computer monitor.
18. DVDs incorporating full-length motion pictures, together with additional and ancillary features such as interviews and alternative sound tracks, can be played back for viewing in the home by dedicated, free standing "DVD players" and by personal computers configured with a DVD "drive" and additional hardware or software modules sometimes referred to as "media players."
19. DVDs contain digital information. When motion pictures in form are digital copied or transmitted, the clarity and overall quality of the motion pictures do not suffer (as they do when a copy is made from an analog source, such as a videocassette). Moreover, the fact that the motion pictures contained on DVDs are in digital format allows any unauthorized copies of those motion pictures from DVDs to be widely transmitted over the Internet, stored in computer memory, and duplicated for unlawful sale, transfer or exchange. Once these copies are in the hands of another user, the unlawful process can begin once again because the copies have the clarity and quality of the original DVDs containing the motion picture.
The Contents Scramble System ("CSS")
20. Because motion pictures in unprotected digital format on DVDs would be subject to ready, unlimited copying and create a threat to the market viability of DVD technology, the plaintiffs were reluctant to release valuable film libraries and new film releases without the implementation of a copy protection and access control system. Plaintiffs therefore ultimately adopted a copy protection and access control system developed by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. and Toshiba Corporation -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- in order to provide security to the copyrighted contents of DVDs and thereby provide protection for copyrighted content against unauthorized copying. CSS includes elements of encryption and other security and authentication measures that require DVD playback devices, including appropriately configured personal computers, to operate with certain keys in order to descramble and intelligibly play back copies of motion pictures from DVDs. All members of the DVD industry, including software and hardware manufacturers of DVD players, DVD replicators and the content providers -- the motion picture studios -- adopted CSS as direct licensees or by contracting through CSS licensees.
21. Each of the Plaintiffs relied on the security provided by CSS in manufacturing, producing and distributing to the public copyrighted motion pictures in DVD format. Those motion pictures, many of which involved investments of tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars, were distributed on CSS-protected DVDs.
The Descrambling of CSS and the Creation and Proliferation of the "DeCSS" Utility
22. On information and belief, hackers in Europe were able to descramble the encryption on DVDs and create -- and post on the World Wide Web -- an unauthorized utility commonly referred to as "DeCSS," which allows motion pictures in DVD format to be decrypted and illegally copied.
23. Subsequently, defendant Reimerdes posted DeCSS on his Internet web site, www.dvd-copy.com, along with the statement "Yes, you can trade DVD movie files over the Internet . . . You can break the encryption on any DVD and allow users to copy the contents of a DVD onto the a [sic] hard drive or alternative media! Notice: The DVD Copy Control Association are cocksuckers!" Reimerdes also told Internet users, under a section titled "How To Find/Trade FREE DVD Movies Online," that "people gather online in impromptu communities and trade these digital copies through one-to-one file transfers and group chatting."
24. Defendant Eric Corley a/k/a Emmanuel Goldstein also posted DeCSS on his Internet web site www.2600.com/news/1999/1112-files. Corley's site states that DeCSS is a "free DVD decoder" that allows "people to copy DVDs." Corley's site also exhorts others ("as many of you as possible all throughout the world") to "take and mirror [the DeCSS] files . . .."
25. Defendant Roman Kazan also posted DeCSS on his Internet web site, www.krackdown.com/decss/.
Claim for Relief
(Violation of Provisions Governing Circumvention
of Copyright Protection Systems,
17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq,)
26. Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 25, inclusive.
27. The Copyright Act, Title 17 U.S.C. 1201(a)(2), provides that:
[n]o person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that --
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
28. Each defendant offers to the public, provides, or otherwise traffics in, DeCSS through his Internet website.
29. CSS is a technological measure that (a) effectively controls access to works protected by the Copyright Act, and (b) effectively protects rights of copyright owners to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof.
30. DeCSS (a) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, (b) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, and/or (c) is marketed by Defendants and/or others acting in concert with them with the knowledge of its use in circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS.
31. By offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, Defendants have violated the provisions governing Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems set forth in the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
32. As a direct and proximate result of such violations, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be proven at trial.
33. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants' violations will continue. Plaintiffs' remedy at law is not adequate. Protection of Plaintiffs' rights must include an injunction, as well as other remedies available.
Prayer for Relief
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally, as follows:
1. For a grant of preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against the Defendants, their agents, servants, employees, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with them, enjoining them from:
(a) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, and
(b) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that:
(i) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing, or circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof,
(ii) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent, or to circumvent the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof, or
(iii) is marketed by Defendants and/or others acting in concert with them with the knowledge of its use in circumventing, or in circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to the Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof;
2. For damages in such amount as may be found and requiring Defendants to account for and pay over to Plaintiffs all profits delivered from all acts of circumvention of copyright protection systems; alternatively, for statutory damages in the amount of $2,500 for each act of circumvention, device, product, component, offer, or such other amount as may be proper pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(c); and
3. For Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(b).
4. For prejudgment interest;
5. For costs incurred in this action;
6. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
the URL is mangled..stupid assholes at MPAA dont even know how to write HTML. Anyway heres one claim :
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.; PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION; METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC.; TRISTAR PICTURES, INC.; COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.; TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT CO., L.P.; DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.; AND TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JERAIMEE HUGHES,
Defendant. )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.: _____________
)
COMPLAINT
(For Violation of Provisions Governing Circumvention
of Copyright Protection Systems, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.)
Plaintiffs Universal City Studios, Inc.; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc.; TriStar Pictures, Inc.; Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.; Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P.; Disney Enterprises, Inc.; and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation by their attorneys Cummings & Lockwood, as and for their complaint, allege as follows:
Nature of the Claims
1. This is a Complaint for injunctive relief and for money damages and related relief against Jeraimee Hughes ("Hughes" or "Defendant"), an individual responsible for proliferating a software device that unlawfully defeats the DVD copy protection and access control system -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- so that individuals can make, distribute, and/or otherwise electronically transmit or perform unauthorized copies of Plaintiffs' copyrighted motion pictures and other audiovisual works. The acts of the Defendant, which are described more fully below, violate the provisions of the United States Copyright Act governing circumvention of copyright protection systems, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.
The Parties
2. Plaintiff Universal City Studios, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
3. Plaintiff Paramount Pictures Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
4. Plaintiff Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
5. Plaintiff TriStar Pictures, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
6. Plaintiff Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
7. Plaintiff Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P. is a limited partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware.
8. Plaintiff Disney Enterprises, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
9. Plaintiff Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
10. Plaintiffs are the major motion picture studios in the United States. Each plaintiff is engaged in the business of producing, manufacturing, and/or distributing copyrightable and copyrighted material, including, specifically, motion pictures. Plaintiffs distribute motion pictures theatrically, via television broadcast, and on portable media such as videocassettes tapes and digital versatile discs ("DVDs") for distribution in the home video market. In the course of its business, each plaintiff or its predecessor in interest obtained ownership of the United States copyrights, the exclusive reproduction, adaptation, and/or distribution rights under United States copyrights, and/or the state statutory and common law rights, in various motion pictures embodied in such DVDs. Plaintiffs are the leading producers and distributors of motion pictures in DVD format in the United States, including such recent blockbusters as "Titanic" and "The Matrix," and approximately 4,000 titles have been released in the United States on DVD to date. Current industry estimates place DVD sales at over 1,000,000 units per week.
11. On information and belief, defendant Hughes either resides or has his principal place of business at 50 North Taylor Avenue, Norwalk, Connecticut 06854. Defendant Hughes operates an Internet web site addressed as www.ct2600.org/2600-DVD.html.
Jurisdiction and Venue
12. The Court has jurisdiction of this action under 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq., 28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal question) and 1338(a) (copyright).
13. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant in that he either resides or has his principal place of business in the State of Connecticut.
14. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. 1400(a) as (a) this is a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred, and/or (b) this is a judicial district in which Defendant resides, and/or (c) this is a judicial district in which Defendant may be found, and there is no judicial district in which the action may otherwise be brought.
Background Facts
The DVD Technology
15. With the advent of the VCR and videocassette tapes, home viewing of motion pictures became a convenient, inexpensive way to enjoy motion pictures. DVDs are 5-inch-wide discs that hold full-length motion pictures, are the most current technological advancement for private home viewing of motion pictures. This technology significantly improves the clarity and the overall quality of the motion picture when played on a television screen or computer monitor.
16. DVDs incorporating full-length motion pictures, together with additional and ancillary features such as interviews and alternative sound tracks, can be played back for viewing in the home by dedicated, free standing "DVD players" and by personal computers configured with a DVD "drive" and additional hardware or software modules sometimes referred to as "media players."
17. DVDs contain digital information. When motion pictures in form are digital copied or transmitted, the clarity and overall quality of the motion pictures do not suffer (as they do when a copy is made from an analog source, such as a videocassette). Moreover, the fact that the motion pictures contained on DVDs are in digital format allows any unauthorized copies of those motion pictures from DVDs to be widely transmitted over the Internet, stored in computer memory, and duplicated for unlawful sale, transfer or exchange. Once these copies are in the hands of another user, the unlawful process can begin once again because the copies have the clarity and quality of the original DVDs containing the motion picture.
The Contents Scramble System ("CSS")
18. Because motion pictures in unprotected digital format on DVDs would be subject to ready, unlimited copying and create a threat to the market viability of DVD technology, the plaintiffs were reluctant to release valuable film libraries and new film releases without the implementation of a copy protection and access control system. Plaintiffs therefore ultimately adopted a copy protection and access control system developed by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. and Toshiba Corporation -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- in order to provide security to the copyrighted contents of DVDs and thereby provide protection for copyrighted content against unauthorized copying. CSS includes elements of encryption and other security and authentication measures that require DVD playback devices, including appropriately configured personal computers, to operate with certain keys in order to descramble and intelligibly play back copies of motion pictures from DVDs. All members of the DVD industry, including software and hardware manufacturers of DVD players, DVD replicators and the content providers -- the motion picture studios -- adopted CSS as direct licensees or by contracting through CSS licensees.
19. Each of the Plaintiffs relied on the security provided by CSS in manufacturing, producing and distributing to the public copyrighted motion pictures in DVD format. Those motion pictures, many of which involved investments of tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars, were distributed on CSS-protected DVDs.
The Descrambling of CSS and the Creation and Proliferation of the "DeCSS" Utility
20. On information and belief, hackers in Europe were able to descramble the encryption on DVDs and create -- and post on the World Wide Web -- an unauthorized utility commonly referred to as "DeCSS," which allows motion pictures in DVD format to be decrypted and illegally copied.
21. Subsequently, defendant Hughes posted DeCSS on his Internet web site, www.ct2600.org/2600-DVD.html. Hughes' site states that DeCSS is a "free DVD decoder" that allows "people to copy DVDs."
Claim for Relief
(Violation of Provisions Governing Circumvention
of Copyright Protection Systems,
17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq,)
22. Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 21, inclusive.
23. The Copyright Act, Title 17 U.S.C. 1201(a)(2), provides that:
[n]o person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that --
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
24. Defendant Hughes offers to the public, provides, or otherwise traffics in, DeCSS through his Internet website.
25. CSS is a technological measure that (a) effectively controls access to works protected by the Copyright Act, and (b) effectively protects rights of copyright owners to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof.
26. DeCSS (a) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, (b) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, and/or (c) is marketed by Defendant and/or others acting in concert with him with the knowledge of its use in circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS.
27. By offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, Defendant has violated the provisions governing Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems set forth in the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
28. As a direct and proximate result of such violations, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be proven at trial.
29. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendant's violations will continue. Plaintiffs' remedy at law is not adequate. Protection of Plaintiffs' rights must include an injunction, as well as other remedies available.
Prayer for Relief
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendant as follows:
1. For a grant of preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against Defendant, his agents, servants, employees, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with him, enjoining him from:
(a) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, and
(b) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that:
(i) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing, or circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof,
(ii) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent, or to circumvent the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof, or
(iii) is marketed by Defendant and/or others acting in concert with him with the knowledge of its use in circumventing, or in circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to the Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof;
2. For damages in such amount as may be found and requiring Defendant to account for and pay over to Plaintiffs all profits delivered from all acts of circumvention of copyright protection systems; alternatively, for statutory damages in the amount of $2,500 for each act of circumvention, device, product, component, offer, or such other amount as may be proper pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(c);
3. For Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(b);
4. For prejudgment interest;
5. For costs incurred in this action; and
6. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Slashdot Mirror
heh. heh. welcome to the GPL. companies are basically arseholes who are out to make money and wouldnt compensate you the money unless you ordered em to. i recommend you just GPL it rathe4r than try and make money of it..it will get you nowhere. its best to work for a company and release GPLed software on the side. works nicely for everyone and thats what i do.
ssh 1.2.27 (patched) or 1.2.28...no other alternative has been that badly *thrashed* by everyone in sight over so many *years*. of course openssh is equally secure but there arent that many people hammering it yet.
unfortunately NT kernel programmers are hard to come by since the kernel is not open sourced and writing kernel modules is discouraged due to M$'s high pricing. you can try headhunting at micro$oft directly using one of their ex kernel guys but this will be $$$. of course, you can scrap the idea and simply write a usermode application which does it..winnt allows a non kernel subsystem to add calls to its ring 0 subsystem. see phrack magazine for sample code (they wanted to write a winnt rootkit but the principle is the same)...i *dislike* (well ok..*hate*..*loathe*) win9x/nt/2k by default anyway, so im sticking with unix kernel hacking.
try a decent modern trident SVGA card..most unixen support tridents since they were one of the few cards to come out first...although they may not go that high. alternatively try an old ATI Mach64..it does go to 1280 x 1024, 24bpp on my gateway. ive seen most OSen supporting em outta the box. Of course you can use any card that works with XFree is youre going to run XFree86 on those systems instead of the X server used by default.
the star trek museum/display in seattle had a needle less injector in a display case using high pressure air last time i saw it a while back (1997).
kppp, modemtool or XISP can do it..kppp is probably the best pointer and clicker tho. and yes, it works on gnome and ships with redhat.
yes. it becomes prior art since its in the public domain. of course the companies can always patent up the surrounding stuff or other applications of it...
nope. i do the same. never use preinstalled stuff - always customise it. Its good security and you also know how the machine is set up. theres always *something* those preinstalled OSes dont get right...and how do you really know how many patches are installed etc etc.
actually you can. some new compaqs have a soft bios -- the bios exists on a partition on the hard drive. format/repartition and reinstall the machine and voila - no bios. Also most home machines comes with win9x preinstalled and no install cd - win9x dies and you cant reinstall it.
in case its a frivilous lawsuit and they loose.
isnt this what mosanto was planning for its bio engineered plants ? Dip the seeds in a chemical to flip the terminator gene to the on position and voila - no more fertile seeds which can germinate.
not the sprinkler system. the fire department responded to the fire which started inside the C90 and they put it out with dry extinguishers which wrecked it,.
www.gjt.org for some really nice classes too.
You can get upto 20 fps at 900 x 642 pixels, 24bpp from Java on a pii-333 or higher. not great - but it should be good enough.
its already included. check the linux kernel mailing list and alans reply. BTW, many to many is not going in - userland threading is bad bad bad.
nope. IBM CISC AS/400s cant run IBM RISC compiled AS/400 software. 32->64 is a helluva lot easier than converting instructions on the fly to a VLIW CPU.
nope. from what i gather this just goes to sleep and back up again at full speed with noops/hlt for power saving. variable speed asynchronous machines cant be handled by linux due to its bogomips setting..basically it loops when booting up and stores the cpu rating which it uses for timing. Linux cant handle asynchronous machine architectures yet (and indeed no solution was presented other than checking the do_hardware_timer() in the last kernmel discussion on the subject - check the mailing list - and this solutions was rejected since it was too costly in terms of cpu time). BTW, i'd love to know whether this chip can run the java VM at full CPU speed - i'd love to crunch my servlets on a non dedicated java vm emulating processor which apache runs x86 instructions as usual.
Actually debian wont install at all on certain types of hardware. I've never had a problem with installing slackware on a 386SX-16 with 4mb ram and a 40mb hdd using text mode custom slackware floppy install. however debian hamm installed ok on it, but newer debians refused to due to space limitations. This is silly - why the heck cant we select base install packages in debian ? i'd love to upgrade my machine with a newer debian but the installer is too automated. and dont get me started about the fact debian has dynamically linked every godammed binary they have in there. WTF do i need to have so many libraries for ?
hehe. i remember what that was like...oh well, at least COMit had software MNP 5.
8. Rob and crew are waiting for andovers new server51 site - the answer to sourceforge hosted at freshmeat.
server51.freshmeat.net..andovers soon to be answer to sourceforge.
the defendants are :
www.ct2600.org - a alt2600 fan site.
www.dvd-copy.com - duh
www.2600.com - obvious
www.krackdown.com/decss - ditto
In short, they seem to be going after only the people who were within their jurisdiction - NY and CT.
Leon P. Gold (LG-1434)
William M. Hart (WH-1604)
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
1585 Broadway
New York, New York 10036
(212) 969-3000 Telephone
(212) 969-2900 Facsimile
Jon A. Baumgarten (pro hac vice admission to be applied for)
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
1233 20th Street, N.W., Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036-2396
(202) 416-6800 Telephone
(202) 416-6899 Facsimile
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.; PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION; METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC.; TRISTAR PICTURES, INC.; COLUMBIA PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.; TIME WARNER ENTERTAINMENT CO., L.P.; DISNEY ENTERPRISES, INC.; AND TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SHAWN C. REIMERDES; ERIC CORLEY A/K/A "EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN"; AND ROMAN KAZAN,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
00 Civ. _____________
COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS GOVERNING CIRCUMVENTION OF COPYRIGHT PROTECTION SYSTEMS, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.
)
Plaintiffs Universal City Studios, Inc.; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc.; TriStar Pictures, Inc.; Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.; Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P.; Disney Enterprises, Inc.; and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation by their attorneys Proskauer Rose LLP, as and for their complaint, allege as follows:
Nature of the Claims
1. This is a Complaint for injunctive relief and for money damages and related relief against Shawn C. Reimerdes ("Reimerdes"), Eric Corley a/k/a "Emmanuel Goldstein" ("Corley") and Roman Kazan ("Kazan") (collectively, the "Defendants"), individuals responsible for proliferating a software device that unlawfully defeats the DVD copy protection and access control system -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- so that individuals can make, distribute, and/or otherwise electronically transmit or perform unauthorized copies of Plaintiffs' copyrighted motion pictures and other audiovisual works. The acts of the Defendants, which are described more fully below, violate the provisions of the United States Copyright Act governing circumvention of copyright protection systems, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.
The Parties
2. Plaintiff Universal City Studios, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
3. Plaintiff Paramount Pictures Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
4. Plaintiff Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
5. Plaintiff TriStar Pictures, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
6. Plaintiff Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
7. Plaintiff Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P. is a limited partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware.
8. Plaintiff Disney Enterprises, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
9. Plaintiff Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
10. Plaintiffs are the major motion picture studios in the United States. Each plaintiff is engaged in the business of producing, manufacturing, and/or distributing copyrightable and copyrighted material, including, specifically, motion pictures. Plaintiffs distribute motion pictures theatrically, via television broadcast, and on portable media such as videocassettes tapes and digital versatile discs ("DVDs") for distribution in the home video market. In the course of its business, each plaintiff or its predecessor in interest obtained ownership of the United States copyrights, the exclusive reproduction, adaptation, and/or distribution rights under United States copyrights, and/or the state statutory and common law rights, in various motion pictures embodied in such DVDs. Plaintiffs are the leading producers and distributors of motion pictures in DVD format in the United States, including such recent blockbusters as "Titanic" and "The Matrix," and approximately 4,000 titles have been released in the United States on DVD to date. Current industry estimates place DVD sales at over 1,000,000 units per week.
11. On information and belief, defendant Reimerdes either resides or has his principal place of business at 295 Greenwich St., New York, NY 10007 and/or 162-14 Cryders Lane, Whitestone, NY 11357. Defendant Reimerdes operates an Internet web site addressed as www.dvd-copy.com.
12. On information and belief, defendant Corley, who, on information and belief, uses the nom de net "Emmanuel Goldstein," either resides or has his principal place of business at 7Strong's Lane, Setauket, New York. Corley a/k/a Emmanual Goldstein operates an Internet web site at www.2600.com/news/1999/1112-files/.
13. On information and belief, defendant Kazan either resides or has his principal place of business at 16 E. 55th Street, New York, New York 10022. Defendant Kazan operates an Internet web site at www.krackdown.com/decss/.
Jurisdiction and Venue
14. The Court has jurisdiction of this action under 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq., 28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal question) and 1338(a) (copyright).
15. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants in that each Defendant either resides or has his principal place of business in the State of New York.
16. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. 1400(a) as (a) this is a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred, and/or (b) all of the defendants reside in the State of New York and this is a judicial district in which some of the defendants reside, and/or (c) this is a judicial district in which some defendants may be found, and there is no judicial district in which the action may otherwise be brought.
Background Facts
The DVD Technology
17. With the advent of the VCR and videocassette tapes, home viewing of motion pictures became a convenient, inexpensive way to enjoy motion pictures. DVDs are 5-inch-wide discs that hold full-length motion pictures, are the most current technological advancement for private home viewing of motion pictures. This technology significantly improves the clarity and the overall quality of the motion picture when played on a television screen or computer monitor.
18. DVDs incorporating full-length motion pictures, together with additional and ancillary features such as interviews and alternative sound tracks, can be played back for viewing in the home by dedicated, free standing "DVD players" and by personal computers configured with a DVD "drive" and additional hardware or software modules sometimes referred to as "media players."
19. DVDs contain digital information. When motion pictures in form are digital copied or transmitted, the clarity and overall quality of the motion pictures do not suffer (as they do when a copy is made from an analog source, such as a videocassette). Moreover, the fact that the motion pictures contained on DVDs are in digital format allows any unauthorized copies of those motion pictures from DVDs to be widely transmitted over the Internet, stored in computer memory, and duplicated for unlawful sale, transfer or exchange. Once these copies are in the hands of another user, the unlawful process can begin once again because the copies have the clarity and quality of the original DVDs containing the motion picture.
The Contents Scramble System ("CSS")
20. Because motion pictures in unprotected digital format on DVDs would be subject to ready, unlimited copying and create a threat to the market viability of DVD technology, the plaintiffs were reluctant to release valuable film libraries and new film releases without the implementation of a copy protection and access control system. Plaintiffs therefore ultimately adopted a copy protection and access control system developed by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. and Toshiba Corporation -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- in order to provide security to the copyrighted contents of DVDs and thereby provide protection for copyrighted content against unauthorized copying. CSS includes elements of encryption and other security and authentication measures that require DVD playback devices, including appropriately configured personal computers, to operate with certain keys in order to descramble and intelligibly play back copies of motion pictures from DVDs. All members of the DVD industry, including software and hardware manufacturers of DVD players, DVD replicators and the content providers -- the motion picture studios -- adopted CSS as direct licensees or by contracting through CSS licensees.
21. Each of the Plaintiffs relied on the security provided by CSS in manufacturing, producing and distributing to the public copyrighted motion pictures in DVD format. Those motion pictures, many of which involved investments of tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars, were distributed on CSS-protected DVDs.
The Descrambling of CSS and the Creation and Proliferation of the "DeCSS" Utility
22. On information and belief, hackers in Europe were able to descramble the encryption on DVDs and create -- and post on the World Wide Web -- an unauthorized utility commonly referred to as "DeCSS," which allows motion pictures in DVD format to be decrypted and illegally copied.
23. Subsequently, defendant Reimerdes posted DeCSS on his Internet web site, www.dvd-copy.com, along with the statement "Yes, you can trade DVD movie files over the Internet . . . You can break the encryption on any DVD and allow users to copy the contents of a DVD onto the a [sic] hard drive or alternative media! Notice: The DVD Copy Control Association are cocksuckers!" Reimerdes also told Internet users, under a section titled "How To Find/Trade FREE DVD Movies Online," that "people gather online in impromptu communities and trade these digital copies through one-to-one file transfers and group chatting."
24. Defendant Eric Corley a/k/a Emmanuel Goldstein also posted DeCSS on his Internet web site www.2600.com/news/1999/1112-files. Corley's site states that DeCSS is a "free DVD decoder" that allows "people to copy DVDs." Corley's site also exhorts others ("as many of you as possible all throughout the world") to "take and mirror [the DeCSS] files . . . ."
25. Defendant Roman Kazan also posted DeCSS on his Internet web site, www.krackdown.com/decss/.
Claim for Relief
(Violation of Provisions Governing Circumvention
of Copyright Protection Systems,
17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq,)
26. Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 25, inclusive.
27. The Copyright Act, Title 17 U.S.C. 1201(a)(2), provides that:
[n]o person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that --
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
28. Each defendant offers to the public, provides, or otherwise traffics in, DeCSS through his Internet website.
29. CSS is a technological measure that (a) effectively controls access to works protected by the Copyright Act, and (b) effectively protects rights of copyright owners to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof.
30. DeCSS (a) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, (b) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, and/or (c) is marketed by Defendants and/or others acting in concert with them with the knowledge of its use in circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS.
31. By offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, Defendants have violated the provisions governing Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems set forth in the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
32. As a direct and proximate result of such violations, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be proven at trial.
33. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants' violations will continue. Plaintiffs' remedy at law is not adequate. Protection of Plaintiffs' rights must include an injunction, as well as other remedies available.
Prayer for Relief
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally, as follows:
1. For a grant of preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against the Defendants, their agents, servants, employees, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in participation with them, enjoining them from:
(a) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, and
(b) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that:
(i) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing, or circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof,
(ii) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent, or to circumvent the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof, or
(iii) is marketed by Defendants and/or others acting in concert with them with the knowledge of its use in circumventing, or in circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to the Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof;
2. For damages in such amount as may be found and requiring Defendants to account for and pay over to Plaintiffs all profits delivered from all acts of circumvention of copyright protection systems; alternatively, for statutory damages in the amount of $2,500 for each act of circumvention, device, product, component, offer, or such other amount as may be proper pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(c); and
3. For Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(b).
4. For prejudgment interest;
5. For costs incurred in this action;
6. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
DATED: January 14, 2000
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
By: ______________________
Leon P. Gold (LG-1434)
William M. Hart (WH-1604)
1585 Broadway
New York, New York 10036
(212) 969-3000 Telephone
(212) 969-2900 Facsimile
- and -
Jon A. Baumgarten (pro hac vice admission
to be applied for)
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
1233 20th Street, N.W., Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036-2396
(202) 416-6800 Telephone
(202) 416-6899 Facsimile
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
the URL is mangled..stupid assholes at MPAA dont even know how to write HTML. Anyway heres one claim :
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC.;
PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION;
METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS INC.;
TRISTAR PICTURES, INC.; COLUMBIA
PICTURES INDUSTRIES, INC.; TIME WARNER
ENTERTAINMENT CO., L.P.; DISNEY
ENTERPRISES, INC.; AND TWENTIETH
CENTURY FOX FILM CORPORATION,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JERAIMEE HUGHES,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No.: _____________
)
COMPLAINT
(For Violation of Provisions Governing Circumvention
of Copyright Protection Systems, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.)
Plaintiffs Universal City Studios, Inc.; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc.; TriStar Pictures, Inc.; Columbia Pictures Industries,
Inc.; Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P.; Disney Enterprises, Inc.; and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation by their attorneys Cummings & Lockwood, as
and for their complaint, allege as follows:
Nature of the Claims
1. This is a Complaint for injunctive relief and for money damages and related relief against Jeraimee Hughes ("Hughes" or "Defendant"), an individual responsible for
proliferating a software device that unlawfully defeats the DVD copy protection and access control system -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- so that
individuals can make, distribute, and/or otherwise electronically transmit or perform unauthorized copies of Plaintiffs' copyrighted motion pictures and other
audiovisual works. The acts of the Defendant, which are described more fully below, violate the provisions of the United States Copyright Act governing
circumvention of copyright protection systems, 17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq.
The Parties
2. Plaintiff Universal City Studios, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
3. Plaintiff Paramount Pictures Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
4. Plaintiff Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
5. Plaintiff TriStar Pictures, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
6. Plaintiff Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
7. Plaintiff Time Warner Entertainment Co., L.P. is a limited partnership organized under the laws of the State of Delaware.
8. Plaintiff Disney Enterprises, Inc. is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
9. Plaintiff Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation is a corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
10. Plaintiffs are the major motion picture studios in the United States. Each plaintiff is engaged in the business of producing, manufacturing, and/or distributing
copyrightable and copyrighted material, including, specifically, motion pictures. Plaintiffs distribute motion pictures theatrically, via television broadcast, and on
portable media such as videocassettes tapes and digital versatile discs ("DVDs") for distribution in the home video market. In the course of its business, each plaintiff
or its predecessor in interest obtained ownership of the United States copyrights, the exclusive reproduction, adaptation, and/or distribution rights under United
States copyrights, and/or the state statutory and common law rights, in various motion pictures embodied in such DVDs. Plaintiffs are the leading producers and
distributors of motion pictures in DVD format in the United States, including such recent blockbusters as "Titanic" and "The Matrix," and approximately 4,000 titles
have been released in the United States on DVD to date. Current industry estimates place DVD sales at over 1,000,000 units per week.
11. On information and belief, defendant Hughes either resides or has his principal place of business at 50 North Taylor Avenue, Norwalk, Connecticut 06854.
Defendant Hughes operates an Internet web site addressed as www.ct2600.org/2600-DVD.html.
Jurisdiction and Venue
12. The Court has jurisdiction of this action under 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq., 28 U.S.C. 1331 (federal question) and 1338(a) (copyright).
13. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant in that he either resides or has his principal place of business in the State of Connecticut.
14. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and 28 U.S.C. 1400(a) as (a) this is a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events
giving rise to the claims occurred, and/or (b) this is a judicial district in which Defendant resides, and/or (c) this is a judicial district in which Defendant may be found,
and there is no judicial district in which the action may otherwise be brought.
Background Facts
The DVD Technology
15. With the advent of the VCR and videocassette tapes, home viewing of motion pictures became a convenient, inexpensive way to enjoy motion pictures. DVDs
are 5-inch-wide discs that hold full-length motion pictures, are the most current technological advancement for private home viewing of motion pictures. This
technology significantly improves the clarity and the overall quality of the motion picture when played on a television screen or computer monitor.
16. DVDs incorporating full-length motion pictures, together with additional and ancillary features such as interviews and alternative sound tracks, can be played
back for viewing in the home by dedicated, free standing "DVD players" and by personal computers configured with a DVD "drive" and additional hardware or
software modules sometimes referred to as "media players."
17. DVDs contain digital information. When motion pictures in form are digital copied or transmitted, the clarity and overall quality of the motion pictures do not
suffer (as they do when a copy is made from an analog source, such as a videocassette). Moreover, the fact that the motion pictures contained on DVDs are in digital
format allows any unauthorized copies of those motion pictures from DVDs to be widely transmitted over the Internet, stored in computer memory, and duplicated
for unlawful sale, transfer or exchange. Once these copies are in the hands of another user, the unlawful process can begin once again because the copies have the
clarity and quality of the original DVDs containing the motion picture.
The Contents Scramble System ("CSS")
18. Because motion pictures in unprotected digital format on DVDs would be subject to ready, unlimited copying and create a threat to the market viability of DVD
technology, the plaintiffs were reluctant to release valuable film libraries and new film releases without the implementation of a copy protection and access control
system. Plaintiffs therefore ultimately adopted a copy protection and access control system developed by Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. and Toshiba
Corporation -- the Contents Scramble System ("CSS") -- in order to provide security to the copyrighted contents of DVDs and thereby provide protection for
copyrighted content against unauthorized copying. CSS includes elements of encryption and other security and authentication measures that require DVD playback
devices, including appropriately configured personal computers, to operate with certain keys in order to descramble and intelligibly play back copies of motion
pictures from DVDs. All members of the DVD industry, including software and hardware manufacturers of DVD players, DVD replicators and the content providers
-- the motion picture studios -- adopted CSS as direct licensees or by contracting through CSS licensees.
19. Each of the Plaintiffs relied on the security provided by CSS in manufacturing, producing and distributing to the public copyrighted motion pictures in DVD
format. Those motion pictures, many of which involved investments of tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars, were distributed on CSS-protected DVDs.
The Descrambling of CSS and the Creation and Proliferation of the "DeCSS" Utility
20. On information and belief, hackers in Europe were able to descramble the encryption on DVDs and create -- and post on the World Wide Web -- an
unauthorized utility commonly referred to as "DeCSS," which allows motion pictures in DVD format to be decrypted and illegally copied.
21. Subsequently, defendant Hughes posted DeCSS on his Internet web site, www.ct2600.org/2600-DVD.html. Hughes' site states that DeCSS is a "free DVD
decoder" that allows "people to copy DVDs."
Claim for Relief
(Violation of Provisions Governing Circumvention
of Copyright Protection Systems,
17 U.S.C. 1201, et seq,)
22. Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 21, inclusive.
23. The Copyright Act, Title 17 U.S.C. 1201(a)(2), provides that:
[n]o person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device,
component, or part thereof, that --
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work
protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls
access to a work protected under this title; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a
technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
24. Defendant Hughes offers to the public, provides, or otherwise traffics in, DeCSS through his Internet website.
25. CSS is a technological measure that (a) effectively controls access to works protected by the Copyright Act, and (b) effectively protects rights of copyright
owners to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or
portions thereof.
26. DeCSS (a) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, (b) has only limited commercially
significant purpose or use other than to circumvent CSS or the protection afforded by CSS, and/or (c) is marketed by Defendant and/or others acting in concert with
him with the knowledge of its use in circumventing CSS or the protection afforded by CSS.
27. By offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, Defendant has violated the provisions governing Circumvention of Copyright Protection
Systems set forth in the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
28. As a direct and proximate result of such violations, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be proven at trial.
29. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendant's violations will continue. Plaintiffs' remedy at law is not adequate. Protection of Plaintiffs' rights must include an
injunction, as well as other remedies available.
Prayer for Relief
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendant as follows:
1. For a grant of preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against Defendant, his agents, servants, employees, and all other persons in active concert or privity or in
participation with him, enjoining him from:
(a) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking in DeCSS, and
(b) posting on any Internet website, or in any other way manufacturing, importing, offering to the public, providing, or otherwise trafficking
in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that:
(i) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing, or circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or
any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or
effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform
and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof,
(ii) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent, or to circumvent the protection afforded
by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively controls access to Plaintiffs' copyrighted
works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly
perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or portions thereof, or
(iii) is marketed by Defendant and/or others acting in concert with him with the knowledge of its use in circumventing, or in
circumventing the protection afforded by, CSS, or any other technological measure adopted by Plaintiffs that effectively
controls access to the Plaintiffs' copyrighted works or effectively protects the Plaintiffs' rights to control whether an end user
can reproduce, manufacture, adapt, publicly perform and/or distribute unauthorized copies of their copyrighted works or
portions thereof;
2. For damages in such amount as may be found and requiring Defendant to account for and pay over to Plaintiffs all profits delivered from all acts of circumvention
of copyright protection systems; alternatively, for statutory damages in the amount of $2,500 for each act of circumvention, device, product, component, offer, or
such other amount as may be proper pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(c);
3. For Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 1203(b);
4. For prejudgment interest;
5. For costs incurred in this action; and
6. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
DATED: January 14, 2000
CUMMINGS & LOCKWOOD
By: ______________________
Robert P. Dolian
Federal Bar #ct04278
Four Stamford Plaza
P.O. Box 120
Stamford, Connecticut 06904-0120
(203) 327-1700 Telephone
(203) 708-3948 Facsimile
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Of Counsel:
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
Leon P. Gold
William M. Hart
1585 Broadway
New York, New York 10036
(212) 969-3000 Telephone
(212) 969-2900 Facsimile
and why not ? i was wunning windoze 3.1 fine with drdos 6 & ndos 7