Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Your Rights Online News

Blizzard Amends Complaint ... Again 15

Patersmith writes "From bnetd.org: Blizzard has amended their compliant again, adding what looks like possible DMCA claims, and adding Rob Crittenden, Wi Yang, and others as defendants. Originally it was thought that the courts would refuse to allow them to add anymore people to the lawsuit since Blizzard/Vivendi missed one of their serving deadlines, but the courts allowed them an exception to add additional defendants. Click here for the full scoop."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blizzard Amends Complaint ... Again

Comments Filter:
  • Is the complaint compliant?
  • by bwt ( 68845 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @11:11AM (#4837708)

    Folks this is a very important lawsuit. Bnetd is challenging BOTH the enforcability of "no reverse engineering" clauses AND the constitutionality of the DMCA on First Amendment grounds. Moreover, this lawsuit is happening in Missouri District Court, which is in the 8th Circuit, rather than the 2nd, which is known for its pro-copyright holder judicial activism (as we saw).

    I hope that this case will get the attention it deserves here on slashdot.
    • by John Hasler ( 414242 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @12:28PM (#4838039) Homepage
      It might get more attention if the Slashdot story provided a link to a summary of the case. Odd as it may seem, there _are_ Slashdot readers who don't know who Blizzard and Bnetd are or why the are in court.
      • by bwt ( 68845 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @02:11PM (#4838619)
        Here is the EFF's blurb [eff.org] about the background of the case.

        Here is the full document archive [eff.org]. In particular the counterclaims document there is very interesting (skip over all the item-by-item responses -- the juicy stuff is at the end).
  • by Shymon ( 624690 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @02:25PM (#4838695)
    maybe if they confuse people enough they'll think they are guilty of something....even if they don't exactly know what
  • by Alsee ( 515537 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @04:06PM (#4839504) Homepage
    IANAL

    Defense's response. [eff.org]

    If defendants win the 5th Affirmative Defence then Blizzard would lose it's relevant copyrights. Sounds like this would effectively put some of their stuff into the public domain.

    It looks like winning on the 14th Affirmative Defence would strike down part of the DMCA as unconstitutional. This is also counterclaim 3.

    Winning counterclaim 4 would declare EULA's worthless.

    On the other hand if if Blizzard wins it is a major threat to reverse engineering, emulation, interoperability, and fair-use.

    -
  • then please make a donation, of an amount equal to the cost of the product, to the EFF, with a statement that you want the funds to go to the Bnetd lawsuit. That way, you can enjoy your Blizzard product and have a clear conscience.
  • hmm I wonder... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by shaitand ( 626655 )
    could you implement copy protection in a virus and make it punishable under the DMCA for anti-virus software to circumvent it?
  • Soon nothing will exist without being "owned," and not in the 0\/\//\/3> sense. Owned like capital, stock certificates, and "rights" that means anyone doing anything slightly similar must bend over for the iron glove of pleasure through pain.

Almost anything derogatory you could say about today's software design would be accurate. -- K.E. Iverson

Working...