ohmikeghod the Venerable wrote:
Admiral Placeholder wrote:
Sir Xsarus wrote:
You post made it seem (to me) as if the game files being transferred into RAM when you ran the program was being termed as copyright infringement. This is not the case in this situation, although I can see how it could be confusing.
Well this is exactly the argument Blizzard is making:
page 10 sec 4B(ii) wrote:
When WoW users employ Glider, therefore, they act outside the scope of the
license delineated in section 4 of the TOU. Copying the game client software to RAM while
engaged in this unauthorized activity constitutes copyright infringement.
license delineated in section 4 of the TOU. Copying the game client software to RAM while
engaged in this unauthorized activity constitutes copyright infringement.
According to them, since we only have permission to load WoW into RAM while engaged in the contract outlined in WoW's EULA and ToU, and by using a botting program one voids one's agreement with Blizzard and nullifies this contract, any copying of the game files (including loading it into RAM to play) constitutes copyright infringement.
It's not the copying into ram that violates the millenium act. It's the reverse engineering/disassembly/decompilation of the program that does. Without having broken the millenium copyright act through those illegal acts, MDY would not know what locations to get the information necessary to have the bots act like they do. If Blizz wins on that count, then MDY can be shut down for good.
While I did not check the entire documentation the above quoted text pretty much says:
If a user does ANY THING that violates the ToU then the user has no right to have the copy he has, therefore, the user has infringed copyright.
This may seem typical and understandable because most EULA's out there are strictly limited to content theft and illicit redistribution. But this Blizz ToU says "you may not cheat the game" and they are using that to say that cheat ingame = copyright theft.
Basically, if this proceeds, then you the user can be found guilty of copyright infringement without performing any act of reverse engineering, content theft or illicit redistribution.
It's very gray area and the ambiguousness in it is legally dangerous.