News Sony malware: the legal perspective

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/11/07/sony_malware_legal/

 

While I don't exactly live in fear of being tried under the DMCA, does this remind anyone of that law that allows a bugular to successfully sue for damages because he tripped on a loose floorboard in the process of ripping off your house?

I've been told by several America friends that this is why when they shoot a trespasser / home invader / whatever, they "shoot to kill". See, if the assailant survives, he can sue for disability or something, but a dead guy can't lodge a complaint. Nevermind the ethics of killing someone, as long as he doesn't sue me!

That's obviously an extreme example, but doesn't it seem crazy that someone could be tried under the DMCA for removing the spyware this CD has installed without their permission? Such a shame these companies (like the MPAA) can't spend their energies figuring out decent digital distribution instead of running around suing everybody.

 

Hmm... illegal to use Sony's fix to remove their illegal software. I think the DCMA, aside from being legal BS, already needs an update. Perhaps "illegal to curcimvent copy-protection software except if the circumvention tool is provided by the publisher".

Of course, considering Sony issued the fix, I don't see them trying to piss off their customers any more by suing them. And I don't think the police would file civil charges against you knowing you'd just chuck that old CRT at their faces. If I'm going to get myself a criminal record, I'll make sure I do it right. You know... Rambo style.

I think I'll just continue not buying anything with their name on it. It's hard enough for me to make legitimate backups of some DVDs (I've found a way, but it's still a pain); not being able to rip my CDs to something slightly more useful than plastic would almost certainly cause a killing spree. And I'd make sure that all violent video games are well-purged off my hard drive first, just in case.

 

Thank god I live in Canada. Just over a 1h drive away is a land of confusing laws and class-action lawsuits. See, there's a reason CD-Rs and the like are more expensive here in Canada, it's a little tax that gets put on recordable media to allow us to make copies of what we want.

But let me get this straight, it's illegal for Sony to put the software on your computer in the first place, but it's illegal for you to remove Sony's illegal software? I think my braing just exploded.

 

Well... If my mind wasn't made up already, this would definitely push me in the arms of P2P networks for expanding my music collection. Nowadays it's simply too dangerous to legally purchase music. Nice move, Sony.

 

I believe you're referring to Tort laws, which allow people to sue for bodily harm due to negligence. For example, if a store fails to clear off their sidewalk from ice and you slip and break your ankle, you can sue them for the medical costs.

The situation you're describing, while possible, would almost definitely never happen. Sure, the burglar could sue for damages, but his chances of winning are almost zero because he pretty much waived his right to stay injury free when he broke in. This would be the same case: even if Sony did sue people who downloaded their uninstall patch, the courts would throw it out immediately considering Sony created the problem in the first place.

For more information, check Snopes or ATRA.

 

Okay, no more Sony stuff for me. Getting an Xbox or a Revolution now. Can't be bothered to buy a PS3 anymore.

Everybody agree?

 

FYI- and if someone else stated this, my apologies, but the "Patch" doesn't remove anything from your computer, it simply makes the files visable. If you try to delete them the old fashion way, then you still FUBAR the registry, and lose your CD-ROM Drive. Its still a long process to remove, Sony's so called Solution simply takes care of the first step....getting the files visable.

I can't wait to see where this goes....because this is overall complete ******** that they do this. Just remember kiddies, those of us State side, can sue for anything....you spill hot coffee on yourself, or burn your tounge at the local resturant on that juicy steak (sorry I'm hungary right now) you can sue. Need I remind you of the McDonalds incident where some lady burned herself with hot coffee, and sued McDonalds for making the Coffee to hot? (She won for our buddies across the pond who don't know about that).

Sony should recall all the CDs with the spyware on it, and re-release it w/o it, and offer a REAL solution to removing the spyware.

 

I've already decided to boycott all sony product, espescially the PS3 and Blu-Ray. PSP excluded because I already own one and use it to run homebrew games. Sony's current behaviour is really ticking me off. What kind of company install malware onto your computer telling you, doesn't provide any way to get it off, and then says that it's for your own good.

Looks like I'm buying a revolution, at least then I can play all those nice NES games. Maybe an XBox 360, always wanted a media center PC.

 

I agree allthough I do have an original xbox, I just start feeling dirty when thinking of getting a 360. (even though it does look incredibly cool) Nintendo really seems like the only nice console company out there right now bring on the revolution.

 

Still missing a major point. This cant be legally sold as a CD. Infact ANY cd with copy protection stuff on it can't be called a CD.

 

I do love the way that the DMCA makes it illegal to hold down the shift key as you insert the CD (Which stops the AUTORUN activating and installing this copy-protection nonsense, thus circumventing the measures).

How insane is that?

Meanwhile, I'll keep on using, say, cdparanoia or EAC to open any discs that have purported "Copy Protection". (Not that I've bought a music CD in at least a year. If I want to listen to anything "new", I'll turn on the radio, not that I need to, as it's all crap or rehashes of older songs)

 

Yes because canada would never try to make laws like the DCMA (cough CPDCI Cough)

the reason your taxes are higher is because canadians tend to trust their goverment .... even when their taxes go to pay for an amusement park.

http://www.negativepositive.org/
http://www.negativepositive.org/****-canada.html

check out the info on canada

 

At the risk of being called pedantic (what the hell, I am pedantic, so sue me ) it can be sold as a CD because it is a CD (and not a DVD, Laser-disc or other media). It can't however be sold with the Compact Disc Digital Audio symbol because that is a CD standard that I think most, if not all enhanced discs fall outside of.

 

lol

you know what i mean

 

Here's an idea *****************************************, ***********,***************,*****! That being said, i'm glad to hear that the warpath has already been struck, and onto sony shall have to pay for the falsely marketed CDs. Yet, if they're going to play the DMCA for using their utility to use their utility, then nail the *******s for invasion of privacy and cybercrimes. They did break into your computer and modify your registry without your knowledge or ability to remove their crap, right?

 

Firehead: not illegal to install the patch, but illegal to tamper with the copy protection. Then again, it's "illegal" to exceed the speed limit, but that doesn't seem to bother most people.

You'd think so, wouldn't you, but I swear this happened because it stuck in my mind as SO idiotic. The icey sidewalk scenario you describe isn't the same thing, because you're allowed to walk there as a shopper. I'm talking about innocent victims because sued by people who were breaking the law when they were in that situation.

There was a case out here in Australia (again, I need to dig up some links) where a farmer was being robbed at gunpoint in his house, and when overpowered one of the robbers and shot / killed him with his gun, the FARMER was charged with manslaughter or something retarded like that.

Imagine a bank robber / drug dealer who might sue for damages after being paralysed by a car crash as a result of a police pursuit. It's all about whether the police followed regulations in chasing him, not the fact that he crashed the car, or that he shouldn't've robbed that bank to start with etc

That's what I'm getting at: to be in violation of the DMCA for removing software from YOUR PC which was installed WITHOUT your consent, from a music CD you PAID FOR is messed up. Or the fact that you bought the CD (and paid for the right) to listen to the music contained therein. Yet you are prevented from transferring that music to your iPod.

Like I have said before, it's a bit like the copy protection on games during the 1990's - the paying customers are forced to jump through all kinds of hoops (looking up keywords in the manual, using code-wheels etc) before they can play the game, but the pirates just laugh and fire it up.

In this instance, the paying customer is being "punished" while everyone else would just torrent the album and wonder what all the fuss was about

 

Aren't there a bunch of games with questionable "copy protection" a friend told me a few games won;t run if you have daemon tools or some other cd-rom emulator installed. You have to download another weird utility to hide the emulator. It sucks how they automatically assume their customers are going to boot-leg the software they buy.

 

Even as a non-audiophile, I completely agree. Though, imo even just adding in any of that stupid autolaunching crap should void it of the term CD as well. Doesn't change the fact that it's printed (well, stamped) on CD media, but if there's anything other than audio, I want that very very clear on the label.

And yes, there have been many instances of idiotic lawsuits. Some burglar got himself locked in a garage when the family was on vacation for a week, he survived on Pepsi and cat food IIRC. Sued and won a crapload. Not quite the same as the guy who thought "Cruise Control" on his new Winnebago meant "Autopilot" and went careening off the road (who won upwards of $500k, and got an idiotproofing warning installed in all future manuals), but still, you can sue over anything in America, and win no matter how much you deserve to rot in prison just for thinking up such a rediculous lawsuit.

I mean ffs if they're going to make me keep the CD in the drive to play my games, just get rid of the damn key, as I clearly either own the game or could get an illegal/duped/generated key very easily to go with my bootlegged copy. Which is what I LOVE about Steam, no damned CDs to lose/get destroyed/etc, as long as I can remember my password, I have instant (well, aside from download time...) access to my content worldwide. A bit OT from Audio CDs, but a copy protection quirk nonetheless.

I've stopped buying... really anything. In fact, I don't really even pirate stuff anymore. A CD with 35 minutes of music is hardly worth the $14 they charge, even a legit download for $10 isn't near worth it (even if it was a DRM-free lossless file that I could access on any computer once I've paid for it). I've bought two audio CDs in the last four years or so. Pirated a few more but rarely listen, more of an unauthorized sampling. I work at a video store so I can rent for free, but even when I take movies home and burn myself a copy, none of them are new, simply beacuse new movies downright suck (aside from the fact that half are remakes anyways). Games I tend to actually buy, but only to support the developers, not because it's hard to pirate them. Most software I downright refuse to even consider buying, mostly because it never works right anyways (my computer refuses to play DVDs with any software player, though my lossless transcodes don't have a problem... unfortunately S-video from an actual player looks horrible next to even a very lossy Xvid)

Good point Pope - it's total BS to be in violation (insert rest here).

Why did I pirate things? It worked better than the legitimate equivalent. Always. No previews, UPOs or antipiracy warnings on DVDs. No DRM on music. No needing to leave a disk in my drive constantly to play my games. Why don't I pirate things anymore? The content is so bad nowadays, it's not even worth my bandwidth. How sad is that?

 

I can confirm this on more than a few games (only two pop into mind at the moment, FEAR and sims 2). So far, FEAR has been the worst, I had to actually uninstall Alcohol and completely disable Daemon for it to work. Funny thing is once I put a no-cd patch on I was able to run both programs...

My question is: why is there absolutely no warning on the box of the game that I need to uninstall or disable my legitimately obtained and used software to utilize the game I just legally bought? I even have skimmed through the EULA and there is no notable mention of this.

Think of this situation: I go out and buy said game, open box (invalidating any chance I had at returning the game, as I've now broken store policy), attempt to install game, find it doesn't work because of certain fully-legal programs I'm running, and now I'm stuck with a useless bit of plastic, and $50 out of my wallet that I can't get back.

Yay for screwing the customer over