Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft (
More info?)
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 22:44:31 -0700, "Mike Kohary" <sorry@no.spam>
wrote:
>Davian wrote:
>>
>> I'm simply informing you that you are incorrect that the official
>> servers must always be the best. It is entirely possible to take
>> the ruleset of any game and improve upon it. I know it's true.
>> I've seen it happen. As I said, I played on two private Ultima
>> Online servers which were better run than the official servers. The
>> functionality was better, the ruleset was better, and the skill
>> system was better. And the playerbase was most definitely much
>> better.
>
>With all due respect, UO <> WoW. And Blizzard, unlike Origin, is zealous
>about defending their intellectual property, as well as weeding out cheaters
>and hackers. In reference to your other reply, there is no question that a
>hacked server is copyright infringement, so don't even try to defend it on
>that basis. This is Blizzard's property, and they have every right to make
>sure they remain in complete control of it. The courts back them fully on
>this point.
You don't work for Blizzard or SCO, by any chance, do you? Because
IANAL, but that's wrong on a couple of counts.
Firstly, you misunderstand and misrepresent copyright. Copyright is
about what you write, not what it does or how it does it (which is the
realm of patents, if at all). In particular it's *not* breach of
copyright to produce code that behaves in a similar manner to other
code. Blizzard have copyright on the precise code they wrote, not on
all code that behaves the same. Reverse-engineering to produce
something that behaves the same *is* permitted under law (even in the
States, and despite the DMCA, which limits its use but doesn't prevent
or forbid it) - you have what's termed a "fair use" right to
re-engineer.
Secondly, it's unclear that there's anything wrong with running a
non-Blizzard WoW server (whether or not I think it's a good idea is
not germane). To say that the courts "back (Blizzard) fully" is
untrue; the issue is, as yet, undecided. The Blizzard vs BnetD
action, relating to a similar reverse-engineering of aspects of
Blizzard's Battlenet servers, is still going through the system; the
BnetD appeal was in court as recently as last Monday:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2005062018242469
Now - I don't remotely have the training to know how this one is
likely to play out, but I watch and form judgements. This is in the
Appeals court, so Blizzard clearly won the first round. But I get a
kind of feeling that, far from Blizzard getting the Appeals court to
"back them fully", their case could just possibly be swirling slowly
down the legal pan. In particular I find it striking that the
Blizzard camp seem to have been pitching their argument more at the
"piracy is bad" visceral level than at the legal arguments, whilst the
BnetD camp have been arguing law (and, to an outside, untrained
observer, effectively arguing it). It suggests to me that Blizzard's
lawyers don't feel they have quite as strong a legal case as they'd
like.
Whilst there's no prejudging what courts will decide, they tend to be
somewhat more interested in the law. Personally, I'll be watching
this one closely.
(As indeed, should anyone who's interested in what precisely it means,
legally, to click on that "I agree" button at the bottom of an
on-screen EULA, because the case is about that, as well.)
Cheers - Ian
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram