By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 21 February 2011
Edit Thread
Tsudai said:

Taken from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/1201.html#b as linked in the FAQ at http://www.chillingeffects.org:

"(b) Additional Violations. -

  •  
    • (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;
    • (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; or
    • (C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof.
    • (1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that -
  • (2) As used in this subsection -
    • (A) to ''circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure'' means avoiding, bypassing, removing, deactivating, or otherwise impairing a technological measure; and
    • (B) a technological measure ''effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title'' if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, prevents, restricts, or otherwise limits the exercise of a right of a copyright owner under this title."

The key is part of the PS3's technological protection measure. This part is used soley for the circumvention of this technological protection measure. Geohot "offered" this part to the public.

Er... that's a VERY loose definition... which is why I imagine is why the website you are quoting with doesn't really agree with you, hence the related Github stuff being posted on the website.

I refer you too

"it is my good faith belief that none of the code at https://github.com/hermesEOL/fail0verflow (see reference below) infringes on Sony's copyrights, and that their takedown notice is in error. further, Sony is attempting to abuse the DMCA to avoid public embarrassment (too late) and put the genie back in the bottle (too late), and has failed to meet the minimum requirements for giving DMCA notice (no details provided on which source code lines infringe copyright). the exposure of sloppy crypto implementation on Sony's part in no way infringes on copyright or makes available any of their proprietary internal software; the repository in question contains exclusively original third-party code that does not directly facilitate infringement. I consent to jurisdiction as laid out at http://help.github.com/dmca as of this date."

http://www.chillingeffects.org/responses/notice.cgi?NoticeID=56666

 

I mean, you realize the reason this lawsuit is happeneing in California and not say... New Jersey where the guy actually comittied the "crimes" he is accused of right?


They let you thorw in some things that pretty much EVERYBODY in california sues for, because sometimes you win even if you lose everything else, because the terms are so vague.