OT: Software copyright law?
 

I'm a little curious. I'm not sure about Canadian copyright laws, but I've read that in the States you have the right to make archival copies of software you own just in case you wreck the original. Good so far. However, copy protection often stops people from making such archival copies for themselves. Also, getting around the copy protection, or cracking the game/application/other software is also illegal, therefore making it illegal to create your legal archival copy... So if this is the case and I haven't horribly confused myself or you guys, doesn't copy protection on software deny you of your legal rights, and therefore shouldn't some forms of copy protection (such as Starforce and others that don't allow you to make 1:1 copies of your software) be illegal???

Now, since that's how I understand US copyright law, is there anyone who could enlighten me as to Canadian software copyright law as it regards the issue of legal backups and copy protection? Seems I know the law in other countries but not my own...

***Please note that I do NOT in any way condone software piracy, I'm just genuinely curious as to why the law in some countries contradicts itself and bars you from doing things the law says you can do!***

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

It would be illegal, except that the morons on Capital Hill rushed the atrocious Digital Millennium Copyright Act into law virtually without debating it... The DMCA is what made bypassing copy protection schemes illegal. Starforce would be illegal if it were not for the DMCA.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Corporate tyranny. Eventual goal is for people not to be able to program except in scripting languages, to send or receive information in private or anonymously, to copy or play data. Basically, corporations and governments think only they should be able to use computers.

PvK

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Personally I go by the whole Roman concept of 'If it's a stupid law, it's not a law.' And if a law is contradictory (you're legally allowed to make backups but must violate the law to do so), then it's pretty stupid. Of course, I highly doubt that argument would stand up in court, but if no one knows whether or not I make archival copies, and as long as those copies don't find their way into anyone else's hands, it's not something I worry about.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

They don't want you to have a copy because they often, more often than not, put their software on defective low budge CD's, DVD's that break at the first hint of stress. I have read where many CD's/DVD's have literally shattered in the CD/DVD Rom drives.

The CD breaks, you must buy new copy... that means more sales. The copy right protection just insures the second sale.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Going on on the "contradictory laws" bandvagen..... Here in the Netherlands, it's legal to deal in cannabis, but it's illegal to own it.

In the case of archive copies, I'd say just chock the entire CD into an archive file on a failsafe network. If that doesn't work, I'd say go ahead and break the copy protection.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

I wonder which law would supersede the other in a court of law? Your right to make archival copies, or the illegality of breaking copy protection...

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

On some licenses, they no longer give you the ability to make a backup. The copy on the origional CD is all you get.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

As far as CDs/DVDs go, there hasn't been much success in prosecuting people breaking copy protection when all that is needed is holding down the Shift key (if using Windows; do nothing if you use anything else) or using a sharpie marker. It gets a little iffy for programs like DeCSS, but after initial prosecution on that, I haven't heard of any progress on it, and it's still out there.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Well, I'm just guessing here, but if a court had to deal with a case involving contradictory laws, they'd be more inclined to hold up whichever one existed first. Precendent and all that. So your right to make archival copies would take precedent since it existed before the laws about breaking coppy protection. Hell, it exisited even before they HAD copy protection.
Course I'm not a lawyer, so I can't be sure, but it makes sense to me. Which probably means I'm wrong. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Licenses could never "give" you the right to make copies. That is a right (still) guaranteed by fair use laws. Content owners have no ability to take that right away without getting Congress to change the law. The DMCA makes it illegal to break copy protetion, but it did not take away the right to make backup copies...

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Yup, typical example of how corporations will try to deny you your legal right to something if it might cut into their profits by telling you it's illegal for you to do so. I've personally seen dozens of examples where companies have tried to intimidate people into giving up something they're entitled to by threatening them with lawyers, lawsuits, fines, prison, etc, but on the occasions where the person stood up and refused to be intimidated, the company backed off since they knew they didn't have a legal leg to stand on.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Couldn't the person have them arrested for threats?

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

But does that mean you have the right to break copy protection if it's preventing you from making a legal copy? Not that I could break copy protection even if I wanted to, I'm not that computer savvy.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

No. Breaking the copy protection is illegal, so you could be prosecuted for that... Of course, the whole thing is a heinous violation of consumer rights, so it is best to ignore it and go on practicing fair use rights. As a Canadian, it doesn't apply to you, so you need not worry.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

One of these days people will discover that copyright laws are about as worthless as the paper they have been written upon. Look that the chines, they don't care about US copyright laws.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

I am my own copyright law! (For validation see Mr. Remington and his associate Mr. Ruger.)

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Let's see....
1) leagally speaking, the EULA is only in power because you click the "I agree" button during installation.
2) leagally speaking, the only thing making decompiling and recompiling the program with modifications for your own use illeagle is the EULA
3) Regular copyright law (no distribution) still applies

Query: What happens if, before you install the software, before you encounter the EULA in question, you decompile the software, then recompile it without the EULA?

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

You'd probably have to break the copy protection to do so; DMCA again. Also a lot of the EULAs have clauses to the effect of "by using this software", and its arguable that you're using it.

I sort of doubt the ethicallity of those sort of clauses, but oh well. Much worse is the EULA itself, given that A. its a contract you have to accept to use something you already paid for, and B. if you don't accept it, most stores won't accept a return..

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Presuming, for the sake of argument, that no such copy-protection is in place; perhaps it's downloaded software for a MMORPG, a demo for some utility, software purchased online, or some such.Ah... so if I make up a user agreement for my EVIL(TM) router that basically says anything sent through this device becomes my intellectual property, and then go browse an art site, I can later sue the art site for distributing my intellectual property without my permission, (after all, in order to send the images to my browser, they first had to be sent through my EVIL(TM) router....) despite the fact that the art site had no way of knowing that my router was EVIL(TM), even though if you type the IP on my EVIL(TM) router into any functioning and connected web browser it returns a simple english text web page with the user agreement due to the nature of the EVIL(TM) routing software? No? How does the EVIL(TM) router useage agreement scenerio differ from not encountering the EULA of a piece of software, and still being bound?Oh, it gets better - there's usually a clause that says it's not fit for any particular purpose, while the advertising on the package says that it's great for all sorts of purposes - hmm.... how is "False Advertising" defined? Perhaps "Bait and Switch"? Don't have the recources, but it might just be interesting to test that in court at some point....

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Isn't there something about agreements made under duress?

A company holding my legally purchased property hostage sounds applicable.

PS: "Terrorism"
As national security advisor, I advise that these companies using EULAs be declared part of the "axis of evil" and bombed into the ground like the terrorists they are.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Actually they should by law disclose the agreements PRIOR to purchase. Have any of you tried to return software to the place of purchase? They simply will not take it back. In most cases they will only exchange it. Is that not a violation of some agreement somewhere. Seems to me that most software manufactures say that if you do not agree to the terms of use, that you can return the software for a refund. But if the stores will not refund your money.... they have broken the terms for the agreement.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Yeah, one person doesn't have the money to take a company to court, but a bunch of people do.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

And that answers the first question of which law would supersede the other in court: The one that has the most money protecting it.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

99% of all of the funds won in 99% of all class action lawsuits that are won or are settled end up going the trial lawyers.

American General Finance was once sued for improperly figuring interest on loans. It cost me around $440.00 according to the lawsuit. AG settled for nearly a 100 million or so and when it was all said and done, and mind you there were only about 2,000 plaintiffs, I got a check for, and I kid you not, $0.27.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Well, killing someone is also illegal, however it is legal to kill someone in self-defense. Here, you have two seemingly contradictory laws, one saying you cannot kill, and the other saying you can to protect yourself. Obviously, the law stating you may kill in self-defense takes precedent over the one stating you cannot kill, as an exception is made in cases where breaking one law (killing) would prevent you from excersising your right to something you are entitled to (living). Therefore, one can argue that an exception must be made allowing you to break one law (copying the software) in order to excersise your right to something you are entitled to (archival copy).

PS: This argument actually works! A few years ago I posted a query on an unnamed software company's forum asking how to go about creating a CD image of the installation CDs so I could have a backup. Shortly thereafter, the thread was deleted and I recieved a rather nasty email from their law department stating that what I was attempting was in violation of copyright laws, the EULA, etc. and that if I did not desist in my attempts to do so, I would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I wrote them back a polite little reply informing them that their attempts to prevent me from making an archival copy were in violation of MY legally enshrined right to create an archival copy of legally purchased software. I included a scanned copy of my receipt and advised them (bluffing, of course) that if they did not desist in their attempts to deny me my consumer rights, then I would prosecute them to the full extent of the law. Within three days, my thread was reinstated, and I recieved an apology from their law department along with a detailed email from their tech support on how to create a CD image. Sweet, no?
Also kinda helped that they were running a massive 'Customer First' advertising blitz at the time, so a lawsuit from a customer claiming the company was attempting to deny him his rights wouldn't have gone over too well with the almighty marketing department.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Ouch! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/mad.gif Bet you felt great taking that down to the bank! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif So I guess in the States they don't have those lovely little laws limiting the ammount lawyers can charge to a percentage of the total claim? You should look into getting one of those, they're dead handy. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

I really believe that any licenses/agreements should be published at the place of sale PRIOR to purchas so that the buyer has an adiquite prepurchase chance review and decline the said licenses. Furthermore I believe that if you decline the license or agreement while installing the software the software should still be installed. Refusing to agree to an agreement or license after you bought the product is kinda stupid in my opinion. Afterall you did buy it without knowning there was such a license therefore you should have the right to say no to it and still be able to install the software you purchased.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Well, I wouldn't go quite so far as to say that you should be able to decline the EULA, and still install it, but if you read the EULA and don't agree to it, then you can chose not to install it, then do whatever things you wanted to that the EULA prohibts (like archival copies), and then install the software afterwards, agreeing to the EULA since you've already done all the stuff it says you can't.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

The real ***** of this is that the bank will just turn around and charge its account holders this money in interest on future loans, fees, etc. So really what happened is that lawyers screwed the very same people it claimed to want to help twice, once when they tricked them into screwing themselves out of 100 million, and a second time when they didnt pay out a fair settlement on the class action.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

It's your software. Back it up.

In Oz, click-through EULAs are unenforcable as they were not part of the original "contract of sale" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif ...pretty cool, I think.

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

What I realy like is when someone else installs the software for you. EULA? what EULA?

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

Funny how random strangers click EULAs. I never do. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif
Then they buy another law that says you are a terrorist who can be shot without trial, for even owning a decompiler.

PvK

Re: OT: Software copyright law?
 

This is a riot.

Hey dudes and dudettes... DON'T COPY THAT FLOPPY!

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif