Blizzard Wants Copyright Laws Changed

[nivi]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/blizzard-wow-warcraft,5311.html

Cheating is bad, but does cheating infringe on a video game publisher’s copyright? World of Warcraft-maker Blizzard, a subsidiary of Vivendi, is trying to argue in court that it does. If this argument succeeds, it could change the way all software copyrights operate in the eyes of the law.

Blizzard is currently wrangling in court with MDY, a small company that makes a software bot called Glider that helps WoW players with tedious aspects of character leveling. While it is pretty clear that the MDY software helps users cheat, and even violates the contract Blizzard makes players accept before playing (known as the End User License Agreement), Blizzard goes a step further and says that violating the agreement violates the WoW copyright since players, after accepting the EULA, automatically create a copy of the game in their computer RAM. If the courts agree, and MDY and its customers are found guilty of copyright infringement, Blizzard could reap statutory damages at the rate of $750 per infringement. The company says about 25,000 copies of MDY’s Glider software have been sold.

A variety of organizations are chiming in with briefs to convince the courts that if they accept Blizzard’s argument, it will imply that all media companies with End User License Agreements (software companies, music labels, and movie studios) can prevent the existence of all interoperable software in court. One of these groups, called Public Knowledge, writes that if Blizzard’s argument wins in court, it would prevent any company from selling used media, such as CDs and video game discs.

Blizzard is focused on winning its case against MDY and stopping the WoW cheaters, but it is unclear if the company has fully evaluated the way its argument could change the law for all copyright-holders. The argument hinges on some unusual legal logic: Blizzard’s EULA allows users who accept the agreement to make a copy of the game in their RAM, but people who accept but violate the agreement and still make a copy of the game in their RAM are copyright infringers.

However, all software when run copy and utilize data in system memory, and buyers of any kind of software already have the implicit right to make a copy of the software in their RAM. This is an issue of a copyrights and owner’s rights. Blizzard doesn’t want to treat Wow players are game-owners, but rather as license-holders. Blizzard might have trouble in court with this part, since in past legal issues with video games, courts have treated players as owners.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge imply that rather than pursuing the argument that these cheaters are copyright infringers, they should stick to a simple contract violation suit. However, contract violations don’t come with built in statutory damages, and would win less money from Blizzard.

As if copyright laws weren't already messed up.

 

[~Corsair#01~]

I can certainly see their case. MDY is making profit by selling what is essentially an add-on to their game without their permission. Textbook copyright infringement. By buying this clearly illegal add-on, the customers are guilty also, although I'm not entirely sure what of.

As for Blizzard, I hope they lose the case. They have built what could easily be described as a monopoly on the MMO genre comparable to the MS OS monopoly. Their product has major flaws, in particular it's insistence on artificially high game-play times via "grinding", which in the long run forces players to repeat tedious tasks in order to reach the actual game- thus stretching out their play time and hence the amount they pay in subscriptions. One could argue that you could simply buy a competing producy, but this is extremely difficult since there essentially is no product with a comparable level of popularity and thus you would not be able to play with your chosen group of people in another game.
Blizzard is motivated entirely by profit, which is of course the norm nowadays, but it is not desirable for these individual firms to dominate the video games market.

Video games in the future could go the way of Hollywood, where abscence of competition and guaranteed markets destroys innovation and leada to constantly deteriorating standards.

 

[bhsup]

Well by that reasoning, any screen saver package sold is an add-on to Windows and violates Microsoft's copyright.

 

[sourboy]

As we say in WoW "More pew pew, less QQ".

I think Blizzard is screwing themselves here, but I like their attempt to stop cheating.

 

[scy12]

I can certainly see their case against cheating but accepting their case will open a can of worms.

Blizzard is focused on winning its case against MDY and stopping the WoW cheaters, but it is unclear if the company has fully evaluated the way its argument could change the law for all copyright-holders. The argument hinges on some unusual legal logic: Blizzard’s EULA allows users who accept the agreement to make a copy of the game in their RAM, but people who accept but violate the agreement and still make a copy of the game in their RAM are copyright infringers.

However, all software when run copy and utilize data in system memory, and buyers of any kind of software already have the implicit right to make a copy of the software in their RAM. This is an issue of a copyrights and owner’s rights. Blizzard doesn’t want to treat Wow players are game-owners, but rather as license-holders. Blizzard might have trouble in court with this part, since in past legal issues with video games, courts have treated players as owners.

So in this case there would be less damage if cheating continues and Blizzard does not win the case.

If they win i fear it may become an example for others to follow.

 

[bhsup]

What about my menu machines plug-in for Adobe Go Live? Or plugins for Editplus, and others?

 

[skadistic]

What about my menu machines plug-in for Adobe Go Live? Or plugins for Editplus, and others?

Are those licensed? Or allowed by open use agreements?

 

[philippe]

what about the plug-ins for oblivion? Custom-user made MODS? bad lawsuit, not becuase of blizzards intentions but by how others could interpret this lawsuit.

 

[Mise]

If I enter a motor race, but make illegal modifications to my car, I can get fined for the modifications, but the manufacturer can't fine me for copyright infringement, right?

Now, what if it was the manufacturer that was holding the competition, and awarding prize money. They could still fine me for the illegal modifications, but STILL can't sue me for copyright infringement.

I don't think Blizzard have a case at all. It's pretty sick, actually.

 

[emzie]

I can certainly see their case. MDY is making profit by selling what is essentially an add-on to their game without their permission. Textbook copyright infringement. By buying this clearly illegal add-on, the customers are guilty also, although I'm not entirely sure what of.

It's not an add-on. Glider doesn't touch Blizzard's code.

 

[Mise]

It's not an add-on. Glider doesn't touch Blizzard's code.

It affects the copy of Blizzard's code that's in the RAM, doesn't it? Or at least, it reads it, and effects the game via standard Windows API/keystrokes?

 

[warpus]

I can certainly see their case. MDY is making profit by selling what is essentially an add-on to their game without their permission.

That isn't their case at all, though. Re-read the article!

 

[emzie]

It affects the copy of Blizzard's code that's in the RAM, doesn't it? Or at least, it reads it, and effects the game via standard Windows API/keystrokes?

It doesn't touch Blizzard's code in RAM. It, as you said, reads it and then uses keystrokes to imput commands into the game. That isn't copyright infringment anymore than if I had a robot sitting in this chair hitting the keys as a reaction to what it sees.

 

[Masquerouge]

Isn't this simply a strategy? Like they're not really hoping to achieve that, but just want to scare the other company into a settlement?

 

[Samson]

I really cannot see what case blizzard has with MDY. Glider does not seem like a derivative of WoW, and MDY has no licence agreement with blizzard to breach. The users may be in breach of there EULA, but blizzard should take that up with them, thus stopping them paying licence fees to blizzard (so I cannot see them doing that).

 

[Alpine Trooper]

I remember cheating the hell out of people on Blizzard Servers back when Diablo II came out. Did Blizzard not have secure servers where trainers and other cheats simply wouldn't work?

 

[aarbron]

"Blizzard goes a step further and says that violating the agreement violates the WoW copyright since players, after accepting the EULA, automatically create a copy of the game in their computer RAM."

I don't understand this sentence, what copying to RAM has to do with copyright...

 

[Stolen Rutters]

"Blizzard goes a step further and says that violating the agreement violates the WoW copyright since players, after accepting the EULA, automatically create a copy of the game in their computer RAM."

I don't understand this sentence, what copying to RAM has to do with copyright...

Let me try:

IF the person who bought the game is suddenly considered to have purchased only a license rather than bought the game to own, the player does not automatically get fair use rights... which means you can't copy the program to RAM without their permission. Which means using that other program to cheat, which violates your license agreement, invalidates your license, and thus somehow makes you a copyright infringer because you are making a copy of the software that you really do own but no longer have a license to use...

Ok, I don't understand it either. Once you own it you can copy it to RAM without violating copyright. It sounds like they are claiming you don't own it after you already bought it, because you cheated. I don't get it.

 

[warpus]

You never really own software.

When you buy a game, you're paying for the license to use it. The only thing that you actually own is the physical box and cd.. not the code on it.

 

[Stolen Rutters]

nevermind
df