[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] Blizzard / Battlenet FAQ

On Fri, 2002-02-22 at 11:19, tneu@smithmicrotech.com wrote:

> >What might be a better approach for Blizzard to take is to work with the
> >creators of this software to provide a CD key authentication system.
> >Basically set up a mechanism by which the Blizzard servers can be
> >queried remotely about the validity of a CD key.  This would permit
> >securing their copyright and allow these independent servers to flourish
> >to the benefit of Blizzard and their customers.  At that point, they
> >might have better legal ground if somebody then proceeded to rip out
> >that CD-Key check that Blizzard had helped to incorporate.
> That may be their best approach, but that is not what they have chosen to
> do.  According to their FAQ, they are worried about disclosing how the
> authentication works.

See my thinking is they do a web services style system.  Basically
provide an interface to their system to validate a key.  That way they
don't have to reveal how their key generator works directly.  But
anyhow, it's a moot point now seeing as they decided to take the path to
the dark side.

> I don't think it is necessary for someone to prove that there is a need for
> something before creating it.   Lots of inventions came about because of
> people doing things for their own fun and/or benefit.
> I agree, though, that it may difficult to get the courts to understand.

Yeah I realized after I sent that I should have clarified that a bit
better.  By the terms of the statute, they don't really need to proove
that, they just need to proove substantial non-infringing use.  It seems
like that would be one of the measures that a court would use.  A lot of
it would of course depend on the judge they get.  Some judges would
likely say that there's no substantial non-infringing use because the
supposed non-infringing use is unecessary given free availability of the

> It just goes back to the "Good Hammer/Bad Hammer" discussion.   It pounds
> nails, and murders people.  Is it good or bad?

It's BAD BAD BAD!!!!!

Sorry, I was channeling Jack Valenti for a moment :)