RE: [dvd-discuss] UK ruling against Playstation mods

[Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Zulauf [mailto:johnzu@ia.nsc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 8:00 AM
> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] UK ruling against Playstation mods
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Andy Oram wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks for the pointer.One excerpt:
> > 
> > Judge Jacob stated that Sony licensed games for the 
> territory that they were
> > issued, the licensing of these games did not allow for 
> their use in other
> > territories, therefore whether they were imported for 
> private and domestic
> > use by personal purchase for instance via the internet, or 
> purchased abroad
> > on holiday, they were not allowed by Sony to be played 
> outside of the
> > licensed territory, this argument should be upheld.
> > 
> > So any restriction put by any company in any license can 
> serve as the excuse
> > for enforcing a ban on circumvention.
> 
> Doesn't this conflict with the recent anti-EULA decision 
> w.r.t. Adobe. 
> If an explicitly click-through license isn't binding how can 
> an implicit
> -- "you can't carry this home in your suitcase" because our 
> player won't
> let you binding.
> 
> Is code now more powerful that contract law?
> 
> .002
> 

It doesn't conflict because the Adobe decision was in an
American court and the Playstation decision under discussion
is U.K.

It doesn't bode well, though.  And this CDPA 1988 sounds like
they've had DMCA-issues since long before we have (assumming,
from no basis whatsoever, that the 1988 refers to the year this
act was passed ...)

-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!