RE: [dvd-discuss] Blizzard / Battlenet FAQ

["Ballowe, Charles" <CBallowe(at)usg.com>]

I still don't see how it's a circumvention device under the
DMCA. Battle.net only authenticates one aspect of the game
(playing on their servers). LAN play is allowed as long as one
person playing has a valid CD key and the CD, of course this
requires IPX on the network. The primary purpose of bnetd is 
to allow playing over a tcp network (which is built in to the
games as battle.net play) and not to allow circumvention.

The fact that there is apparently no authentication between 
the client and the server seems to indicate that nothing is
being circumvented. 

Am I missing something? Nothing has changed regarding the 
``primarily designed or produced for...'' language in section
1201, correct?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Hartman [mailto:hartman@onetouch.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 10:53 AM
> To: 'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'
> Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Blizzard / Battlenet FAQ
> 
> 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'
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -Richard M. Hartman
> hartman@onetouch.com
> 
> 186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> > 
>