What kind of legal precedent does the Blizzard/MDY case threaten us with? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Shauk · 05-09-2008, 06:38 PM

http://virtuallyblind.com/2008/03/23...zzard-motions/

to summarize, Blizzard says "modifying our files is against the ToS/EULA"

the law on this seemingly has always been the case with any piece of software of this nature I'd think.

however, Glider was like "ok sure, no problem, we'll do everything in the RAM, it'll never make a modification to the files that way"

and therein lies the case.

what kind of precedent does it lay if all of a sudden computers are at risk of breaking hundreds of License agreements due to a precedent that could be set if this goes in blizzards favor.

this is getting incredibly sticky.

I mean hell, the text in this window is in my ram right now, but it's in the same space as firefox running on vista, is this post, in my ram, violating an agreement with Microsoft? Mozilla? The music playing from my MP3, I bought it but it was copied to my RAM, is this an illegal copy now?

see where I'm going with this?

Hain · 05-09-2008, 09:47 PM

As I understand it, the Glider defeats the purpose of one actually playing the game. It is intended the let the user go off and do other things. Where is the point of that when one is supposed to play the game?

I don't think this will do much. I see where you are trying to go with this... but for the functionality of Firefox, the purpose is to browse the Internet, and all things related to browsing on the internet. If Mozilla suddenly says that "posting on forums with our software is illegal, violating our RAM space" or whatever, you know what will happen? Result: No one will use FF.

I think the same can be applied to other applications where the ToS seems to be violated. If there are too many hassles, people will stop supporting it.

Shauk · 05-09-2008, 10:06 PM

game ethics aside, from a purely technical standpoint, I just wonder where it sits with RAM being considered a space to prosecute on vs actual storage mediums.

Martian · 05-09-2008, 10:26 PM

Nowhere particularly meaningful, so far as I can tell.

TDY's case is that they didn't infringe copyright. This stands on the basis that programs which alter the intended use of the game are not infringing copyright, even if they are infringing ToS. In other words, TDY says this is a contractual thing and not a copyright thing.

Blizzard argues that based on precedent the copy in RAM exists as a second copy for the purposes of copyright infringement. I think this is what you're getting worked up about; the thing is though, so long as the user does not violate the ToS that copy is within the scope of the license. So Blizzard says that if you break ToS you break copyright.

Setting aside for the moment that one of these cases has absolutely no merit (can you tell which?), there is nobody is arguing that the copy of software itself is copyright infringement. That'd be asinine. So here I sit, using Mozilla Firefox within the scope of the ToS. There is absolutely no way to argue legally that I've committed copyright infringement, because I'm still within the scope of licensed use.

If Blizzard wins on this charge, it means that breaking your ToS will constitute copyright infringement rather than contract violation. To the end user this ends up being a totally semantic difference. No doom, no gloom.

05-09-2008, 06:38 PM	#1 (permalink)
Shauk Confused Adult Location: Spokane, WA	What kind of legal precedent does the Blizzard/MDY case threaten us with? http://virtuallyblind.com/2008/03/23...zzard-motions/ to summarize, Blizzard says "modifying our files is against the ToS/EULA" the law on this seemingly has always been the case with any piece of software of this nature I'd think. however, Glider was like "ok sure, no problem, we'll do everything in the RAM, it'll never make a modification to the files that way" and therein lies the case. what kind of precedent does it lay if all of a sudden computers are at risk of breaking hundreds of License agreements due to a precedent that could be set if this goes in blizzards favor. this is getting incredibly sticky. I mean hell, the text in this window is in my ram right now, but it's in the same space as firefox running on vista, is this post, in my ram, violating an agreement with Microsoft? Mozilla? The music playing from my MP3, I bought it but it was copied to my RAM, is this an illegal copy now? see where I'm going with this?

05-09-2008, 09:47 PM	#2 (permalink)
Hain has a plan Location: middle of Whywouldanyonebethere	As I understand it, the Glider defeats the purpose of one actually playing the game. It is intended the let the user go off and do other things. Where is the point of that when one is supposed to play the game? I don't think this will do much. I see where you are trying to go with this... but for the functionality of Firefox, the purpose is to browse the Internet, and all things related to browsing on the internet. If Mozilla suddenly says that "posting on forums with our software is illegal, violating our RAM space" or whatever, you know what will happen? Result: No one will use FF. I think the same can be applied to other applications where the ToS seems to be violated. If there are too many hassles, people will stop supporting it. __________________ ////\\// IRONSKY.NET \\//\\\\

05-09-2008, 10:26 PM	#4 (permalink)
Martian Young Crumudgeon Location: Canada	Nowhere particularly meaningful, so far as I can tell. TDY's case is that they didn't infringe copyright. This stands on the basis that programs which alter the intended use of the game are not infringing copyright, even if they are infringing ToS. In other words, TDY says this is a contractual thing and not a copyright thing. Blizzard argues that based on precedent the copy in RAM exists as a second copy for the purposes of copyright infringement. I think this is what you're getting worked up about; the thing is though, so long as the user does not violate the ToS that copy is within the scope of the license. So Blizzard says that if you break ToS you break copyright. Setting aside for the moment that one of these cases has absolutely no merit (can you tell which?), there is nobody is arguing that the copy of software itself is copyright infringement. That'd be asinine. So here I sit, using Mozilla Firefox within the scope of the ToS. There is absolutely no way to argue legally that I've committed copyright infringement, because I'm still within the scope of licensed use. If Blizzard wins on this charge, it means that breaking your ToS will constitute copyright infringement rather than contract violation. To the end user this ends up being a totally semantic difference. No doom, no gloom. __________________ I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said - Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame Last edited by Martian; 05-09-2008 at 11:06 PM..

05-09-2008, 10:06 PM	#3 (permalink)
Shauk Confused Adult Location: Spokane, WA	game ethics aside, from a purely technical standpoint, I just wonder where it sits with RAM being considered a space to prosecute on vs actual storage mediums.