RE: [dvd-discuss] Blizzard / Battlenet FAQ

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

Seems like another case of estoppel. RE is legal. Having been given 
the opportunity and declined they cannot now claim FOUL! Although, 
theft of service may be an issue.


Date sent:      	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 20:19:49 -0600 (CST)
From:           	Tim Neu <tim@tneu.visi.com>
To:             	"'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-
discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Subject:        	RE: [dvd-discuss] Blizzard / Battlenet FAQ
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Richard Hartman wrote:
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: tneu@smithmicrotech.com [mailto:tneu@smithmicrotech.com]
> > ...
> > > The Intellectual Property Peddlers did it again.   They got
> > > me riled up
> > > enough to write another anti-FAQ.
> > >
> > > As usual, please post any recommended improvements.
> > >
> > > http://www.visi.com/~tneu/blizzard.html
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Q: How do CD keys help reduce piracy?
> >
> >
> > Blizzard: Blizzard uses two main methods to combat piracy: disc-based copy
> > protection and CD keys. As part of the login process, Battle.net
> > authenticates the user's CD key and prevents people from logging in with the
> > same key or an invalid key.
> >
> >
> >
> > tneu: These precautions are typical of software products, however, they have
> > no legal bearing on the matter. Assuming someone has purchased a copy of the
> > software in question, they are free to use it - even if they choose to
> > access an emulated server rather than the company's own.
> >
> > rmh: this is what makes the battle.net clones a "circumvention device" under
> > the DMCA.  if the clones performed the same authentication, then you could
> > run
> > under the free market competetion w/ far less chance of Blizzard being able
> > to pursue a _successful_ lawsuit.  The question is: how important to the
> > BattleNet clones to bypass the CD key authentication?  Is it worth being
> > shut down?  If all you want to do is compete, you may as well do so with
> > less
> > legal exposure.  If you want to make a statement about the DMCA and become
> > the next poster child in court (and we _do_ need one), keep on truckin'
> 
> I'm not sure if this is an old email, or not (it seem vaguely familiar).
> 
> The battlenet clones offered to implement CD-authentication, only to have
> blizzard refuse to co-operate.  So, it would seem that if bnetd is a
> circumvention device, it is so only because reverse engineering the
> CD authentication would be illegal under the DMCA and blizzard did not
> provide any other means of implementing it.
> 
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> ______         _ __                          Military Intelligence
>   /           ' )  )        -KC0LQL-         Honest Politician
>  / o ______    /  / _  . .                   Intellectual Property
> / <_/ / / <   /  (_</_(_/_  -- tneu@visi.com / http://www.visi.com/~tneu --
>