🚀 go-pugleaf

Benny Cemoli wrote:
>  From the government's own summation of the AUSFTA;
> 
> "Sony has also been active in the US, using DMCA litigation or the 
> threat of it to stop software developers allowing Sony games to be 
> played on ordinary PCs, and likewise for other games to be played on 
> Sony Playstations.(52) Restrictions on encryption have the immediate 
> effect of denying a lot of the �fair use� exemptions that normally apply 
> under copyright legislation"

I wish people would post case citations rather than annecdotes.

I did find http://www.estoel.com/resources/eb_cases.shtm which seems to 
show that Sony ultimately lost this case, and presumably wouldn't persue 
a similar case against someone doing the same thing.

In any case, I'm far from clear why one should expect to buy a Sony 
Playstation game and then be morally entitled to play it on other hardware.

> 
> "Whatever the legal issues involved, it is clear that at least some of 
> the industry practices are designed more to maximise profits than 
> prevent piracy."
> 
> "There have been other overseas examples where the MDCA approach has had 
> the effect of stifling innovation and/or competition. For example, an 
> adaptation that allowed users of Apple Macintosh computers to work with 
> external DVD recorders meant that users did not need to buy a new Apple 
> Macintosh in order to use a DVD recorder. Apple claimed that this was a 
> violation of the MDCA and stopped the sale of the upgrade."

The creator of the upgrade was an Apple dealer, who caved in immediately 
to avoid compromising their relationship with Apple. The merits of the 
case were never examined.

Yes, if you buckle as soon as someone mentions DMCA, then you give power 
to others, but that's not really a problem with the legislation.

Sylvia.