Author Topic: C&D: Director's Response  (Read 24492 times)

RySenkari

  • Guardian (+100)
  • *
  • Posts: 156
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #135 on: May 16, 2009, 05:15:58 am »
Quote
So as not to beat a dead horse once more I'll make this quick. In regards to Glenn27 I'll say again. If you were in their shoes could you possibly handle the potential of up to $150K in fines, plus court costs and possible jail time? If your answer is yes then apprently you've got bigger balls then all of us...lol

Well, people HAVE stood up to C&D orders before. Max Goldberg of YTMND comes to mind, he's stood up to orders from Sega and the Church of Scientology, and then there was also the little case where he leaked Harry Potter 7 book spoilers and defied a direct order from Scholastic to take them down.

Difference between Max and the CE makers, however, is that YTMND is basically Max's whole life now, so he was definitely in a position to afford any lawsuit that arose. Also, we don't know what Square Enix would do, they might be more likely to sue than Sega, Scholastic, or Scientology were.

Happy-Dude

  • Earthbound (+15)
  • *
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #136 on: May 16, 2009, 08:15:17 am »
We got to show SE how dedicated the entire Chrono Compendium team is to the Chrono series...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zeality

I mean, come on, from what I can see, Zeality was the very person who brought all pages *Chrono* to accurate, detailed, and featured statuses!!

Otherwise, these pages might have become just a disorganized mess of information... (Like the issue that plagued many other smaller series.)

Dark Serge

  • Time Traveler (+800)
  • *
  • Posts: 882
  • Now, let love bleed...
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #137 on: May 16, 2009, 05:14:24 pm »
Oh, when will you ever learn? Square Enix doesn't care about the fans, they only care about the cash. They can relax, sit back, and have a beer, knowing that people will buy their crap no matter how shittty it is regardless, and the cash will keep flowing in, while meanwhile, aside from making this bullshit we continuously buy, they have nothing else to do but send C&D's to poor hard working guys who are trying to please the fans and repair Square Enix's image a little.

Mikisho

  • Guardian (+100)
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • The Future Refused to Change. We Said Screw You.
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #138 on: May 16, 2009, 10:47:17 pm »
I think that is a load of BS.  If they didn't care about the fans, FFVII wouldn't have gotten all those spin offs of it.  I mean, yeah, they've become old, tedious, and contrived, but it was because fans wanted them at the time.  They did release CT:DS.  It isn't a huge step, but it shows Square IS listening to what the fans are saying, if only a little bit.  If anything, it's a sign saying that all they need is proof.  If they get proof that CT will bring them money, they will give us what we want, because it will give them what they want.  You gotta learn to read between the lines, rather than looking at the lines and calling them crap.  Nothing great ever occured that way.

OverlordMikey

  • Chronopolitan (+300)
  • *
  • Posts: 370
  • There are no maps.You can't map a sense of humor.
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #139 on: May 16, 2009, 11:11:02 pm »
Oh, when will you ever learn? Square Enix doesn't care about the fans, they only care about the cash. They can relax, sit back, and have a beer, knowing that people will buy their crap no matter how shittty it is regardless, and the cash will keep flowing in, while meanwhile, aside from making this bullshit we continuously buy, they have nothing else to do but send C&D's to poor hard working guys who are trying to please the fans and repair Square Enix's image a little.

Ok I've seen this alot. Listen I'm a cynical person (normally), but that is crap. SE is not a living entity, it's made up of living people like you an me. They are not soul stealing demons or evil overlords. They are a corperation. Yes they wanna make money, who doesn't. Do you want money? I guess not. I suppose your busy living off the land with no electricty or mordern convinivences....well beside a computer apparently. It's just more diffcult to reach those responisble, it does not mean they are heartless monsters who sleep surronded by the money they got from killing orphens! Am I exagerateing....I'm not sure the way you act I'm begining to think you think they do that.
What happened to CE is bad, but it doesn't mean SE is evil. Enough demonization!

Glenn27

  • Guest
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #140 on: May 17, 2009, 02:44:33 am »
So as not to beat a dead horse once more I'll make this quick. In regards to Glenn27 I'll say again. If you were in their shoes could you possibly handle the potential of up to $150K in fines, plus court costs and possible jail time? If your answer is yes then apprently you've got bigger balls then all of us...lol


Actually it would depend on the circumstance.  If it was for something I considered insignificant and unimportant then yeah, I'd probably give it up because it didn't matter to me.

But if it was something important to me and near and dear to my heart that I'd regret losing then I'd never give it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ20N6syuwc



If they do give in to SE then all they'll have left is maybe having their own Wiki page to look at and some comments on Youtube videos while thinking about "the good ol' days" and "what could have been", and that'd really be a shame.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 02:56:32 am by Glenn27 »

Seph

  • Iokan (+1)
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #141 on: May 17, 2009, 03:06:39 am »
Oh, when will you ever learn? Square Enix doesn't care about the fans, they only care about the cash. They can relax, sit back, and have a beer, knowing that people will buy their crap no matter how shittty it is regardless, and the cash will keep flowing in, while meanwhile, aside from making this bullshit we continuously buy, they have nothing else to do but send C&D's to poor hard working guys who are trying to please the fans and repair Square Enix's image a little.

Ok I've seen this alot. Listen I'm a cynical person (normally), but that is crap. SE is not a living entity, it's made up of living people like you an me. They are not soul stealing demons or evil overlords. They are a corperation. Yes they wanna make money, who doesn't. Do you want money? I guess not. I suppose your busy living off the land with no electricty or mordern convinivences....well beside a computer apparently. It's just more diffcult to reach those responisble, it does not mean they are heartless monsters who sleep surronded by the money they got from killing orphens! Am I exagerateing....I'm not sure the way you act I'm begining to think you think they do that.
What happened to CE is bad, but it doesn't mean SE is evil. Enough demonization!

The C&D letter that SE sent to CE's Developers is a shameful act of aggressiveness toward their many fan's, and should be seen as such. I have come from the darkest of hiding places to express my anger toward Square, I am here by boycotting any and all games made by Square (Except the ones I already own :P) and/or their associate's as a retaliation to this shameful act. It's not like they've made anything good for years anyway.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 03:14:27 am by Seph »

Mikisho

  • Guardian (+100)
  • *
  • Posts: 196
  • The Future Refused to Change. We Said Screw You.
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #142 on: May 17, 2009, 03:20:55 am »
Please try and refrain from saying things that have been said constantly over the past week -.- we don't need to know every single person that is upset.  You are still free to join the forum, but there really isn't a point joining if you're just going to whine about how evil SE is in ONE post, and then fade away.  Seriously, I'm getting tired of you people  :picardno

Seph

  • Iokan (+1)
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #143 on: May 17, 2009, 03:49:48 am »
...... You people..... I wouldn't have added a Avatar if I was going to fade away, I'm going to try and help, I'm reviewing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as we type here now, and from time to time peeking my head in here so blah to you.

Agent 12

  • Moderator
  • Zurvan Surfer (+2500)
  • *
  • Posts: 2572
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #144 on: May 17, 2009, 04:09:31 am »
Sorry seph I think everyone is a little tense here, we had a long week as you can imagine :)

Browse around you may find a petition that you enjoy.


--JP



DBoruta

  • Guardian (+100)
  • *
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #145 on: May 17, 2009, 10:35:06 am »
Oh, when will you ever learn? Square Enix doesn't care about the fans, they only care about the cash. They can relax, sit back, and have a beer, knowing that people will buy their crap no matter how shittty it is regardless, and the cash will keep flowing in, while meanwhile, aside from making this bullshit we continuously buy, they have nothing else to do but send C&D's to poor hard working guys who are trying to please the fans and repair Square Enix's image a little.

Ok I've seen this alot. Listen I'm a cynical person (normally), but that is crap. SE is not a living entity, it's made up of living people like you an me. They are not soul stealing demons or evil overlords. They are a corperation. Yes they wanna make money, who doesn't. Do you want money? I guess not. I suppose your busy living off the land with no electricty or mordern convinivences....well beside a computer apparently. It's just more diffcult to reach those responisble, it does not mean they are heartless monsters who sleep surronded by the money they got from killing orphens! Am I exagerateing....I'm not sure the way you act I'm begining to think you think they do that.
What happened to CE is bad, but it doesn't mean SE is evil. Enough demonization!

No.  Screw SE.  They're not the same company anymore, and the games they make nowadays suck anyway.  I mean, who "makes a whole new game" by adding on to games over 10 years old?  It just ruins the old game.  Yes, I'm talking about CT DS.  I didn't buy it and refuse to now.  Hell, even though I bought a PS3 in part for the sake of getting FFvsXIII this year, I think I'll just boycott the game. Screw SE.

Seph

  • Iokan (+1)
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #146 on: May 17, 2009, 11:55:40 am »
Sorry seph I think everyone is a little tense here, we had a long week as you can imagine :)

Browse around you may find a petition that you enjoy.


--JP




It's okay, I understand. As for the petition I already singed it :P

Oh, when will you ever learn? Square Enix doesn't care about the fans, they only care about the cash. They can relax, sit back, and have a beer, knowing that people will buy their crap no matter how shittty it is regardless, and the cash will keep flowing in, while meanwhile, aside from making this bullshit we continuously buy, they have nothing else to do but send C&D's to poor hard working guys who are trying to please the fans and repair Square Enix's image a little.

Ok I've seen this alot. Listen I'm a cynical person (normally), but that is crap. SE is not a living entity, it's made up of living people like you an me. They are not soul stealing demons or evil overlords. They are a corperation. Yes they wanna make money, who doesn't. Do you want money? I guess not. I suppose your busy living off the land with no electricty or mordern convinivences....well beside a computer apparently. It's just more diffcult to reach those responisble, it does not mean they are heartless monsters who sleep surronded by the money they got from killing orphens! Am I exagerateing....I'm not sure the way you act I'm begining to think you think they do that.
What happened to CE is bad, but it doesn't mean SE is evil. Enough demonization!

No.  Screw SE.  They're not the same company anymore, and the games they make nowadays suck anyway.  I mean, who "makes a whole new game" by adding on to games over 10 years old?  It just ruins the old game.  Yes, I'm talking about CT DS.  I didn't buy it and refuse to now.  Hell, even though I bought a PS3 in part for the sake of getting FFvsXIII this year, I think I'll just boycott the game. Screw SE.

No they are indeed the same company, Square merged with another company witch give them a bunch of new staff, and management.... sadly after all these years they have just lost their touch, and most likely fired most of the old staff and/or they retired after so many years of ass kicking game making...

I did find that the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act" has some anti-circumvention exemptions witch are long and boring to read, and also the exemption rules are revised every three years, and as far as I can tell they haven't done that since 06 meaning they are going to sometime this year, witch may be a big pain in the ass, eveything I've read could be subject to change sometime this year and could become useless.......


Anyway this is one of the laws their try to hit you with, Bold is the part they are trying to enforce:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 504. Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits3

(a) In General. — Except as otherwise provided by this title, an infringer of copyright is liable for either —

(1) the copyright owner's actual damages and any additional profits of the infringer, as provided by subsection (b); or

(2) statutory damages, as provided by subsection (c).

(b) Actual Damages and Profits. — The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer's profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of the infringer's gross revenue, and the infringer is required to prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work.

(c) Statutory Damages. —

(1) Except as provided by clause (2) of this subsection, the copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just. For the purposes of this subsection, all the parts of a compilation or derivative work constitute one work.

(2) In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000. In a case where the infringer sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that such infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not less than $200. The court shall remit statutory damages in any case where an infringer believed and had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her use of the copyrighted work was a fair use under section 107, if the infringer was: (i) an employee or agent of a nonprofit educational institution, library, or archives acting within the scope of his or her employment who, or such institution, library, or archives itself, which infringed by reproducing the work in copies or phonorecords; or (ii) a public broadcasting entity which or a person who, as a regular part of the nonprofit activities of a public broadcasting entity (as defined in subsection (g) of section 118) infringed by performing a published nondramatic literary work or by reproducing a transmission program embodying a performance of such a work.

(3) (A) In a case of infringement, it shall be a rebuttable presumption that the infringement was committed willfully for purposes of determining relief if the violator, or a person acting in concert with the violator, knowingly provided or knowingly caused to be provided materially false contact information to a domain name registrar, domain name registry, or other domain name registration authority in registering, maintaining, or renewing a domain name used in connection with the infringement.

(B) Nothing in this paragraph limits what may be considered willful infringement under this subsection.

(C) For purposes of this paragraph, the term “domain name” has the meaning given that term in section 45 of the Act entitled “An Act to provide for the registration and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the provisions of certain international conventions, and for other purposes” approved July 5, 1946 (commonly referred to as the “Trademark Act of 1946”; 15 U.S.C. 1127).

(d) Additional Damages in Certain Cases. — In any case in which the court finds that a defendant proprietor of an establishment who claims as a defense that its activities were exempt under section 110(5) did not have reasonable grounds to believe that its use of a copyrighted work was exempt under such section, the plaintiff shall be entitled to, in addition to any award of damages under this section, an additional award of two times the amount of the license fee that the proprietor of the establishment concerned should have paid the plaintiff for such use during the preceding period of up to 3 years.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
And here's the other:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems2

(a) Violations Regarding Circumvention of Technological Measures. — (1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.

(B) The prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to persons who are users of a copyrighted work which is in a particular class of works, if such persons are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make noninfringing uses of that particular class of works under this title, as determined under subparagraph (C).

(C) During the 2-year period described in subparagraph (A), and during each succeeding 3-year period, the Librarian of Congress, upon the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, who shall consult with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce and report and comment on his or her views in making such recommendation, shall make the determination in a rulemaking proceeding for purposes of subparagraph (B) of whether persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under this title of a particular class of copyrighted works. In conducting such rulemaking, the Librarian shall examine —

(i) the availability for use of copyrighted works;

(ii) the availability for use of works for nonprofit archival, preservation, and educational purposes;

(iii) the impact that the prohibition on the circumvention of technological measures applied to copyrighted works has on criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research;

(iv) the effect of circumvention of technological measures on the market for or value of copyrighted works; and

(v) such other factors as the Librarian considers appropriate.

(D) The Librarian shall publish any class of copyrighted works for which the Librarian has determined, pursuant to the rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), that noninfringing uses by persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be, adversely affected, and the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to such users with respect to such class of works for the ensuing 3-year period.

(E) Neither the exception under subparagraph (B) from the applicability of the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A), nor any determination made in a rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), may be used as a defense in any action to enforce any provision of this title other than this paragraph.

(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that —

(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;

(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or

(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

(3) As used in this subsection —

(A) to “circumvent a technological measure” means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and

(B) a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

(b) Additional Violations. — (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 —

(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.

(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.

(c) Other Rights, Etc., Not Affected. — (1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.

(2) Nothing in this section shall enlarge or diminish vicarious or contributory liability for copyright infringement in connection with any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof.

(3) Nothing in this section shall require that the design of, or design and selection of parts and components for, a consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing product provide for a response to any particular technological measure, so long as such part or component, or the product in which such part or component is integrated, does not otherwise fall within the prohibitions of subsection (a)(2) or (b)(1).

(4) Nothing in this section shall enlarge or diminish any rights of free speech or the press for activities using consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing products.

(d) Exemption for Nonprofit Libraries, Archives, and Educational Institutions. — (1) A nonprofit library, archives, or educational institution which gains access to a commercially exploited copyrighted work solely in order to make a good faith determination of whether to acquire a copy of that work for the sole purpose of engaging in conduct permitted under this title shall not be in violation of subsection (a)(1)(A). A copy of a work to which access has been gained under this paragraph —

(A) may not be retained longer than necessary to make such good faith determination; and

(B) may not be used for any other purpose.

(2) The exemption made available under paragraph (1) shall only apply with respect to a work when an identical copy of that work is not reasonably available in another form.

(3) A nonprofit library, archives, or educational institution that willfully for the purpose of commercial advantage or financial gain violates paragraph (1) —

(A) shall, for the first offense, be subject to the civil remedies under section 1203; and

(B) shall, for repeated or subsequent offenses, in addition to the civil remedies under section 1203, forfeit the exemption provided under paragraph (1).

(4) This subsection may not be used as a defense to a claim under subsection (a)(2) or (b), nor may this subsection permit a nonprofit library, archives, or educational institution to manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, component, or part thereof, which circumvents a technological measure.

(5) In order for a library or archives to qualify for the exemption under this subsection, the collections of that library or archives shall be —

(A) open to the public; or

(B) available not only to researchers affiliated with the library or archives or with the institution of which it is a part, but also to other persons doing research in a specialized field.

(e) Law Enforcement, Intelligence, and Other Government Activities. — This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, information security, or intelligence activity of an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, or a person acting pursuant to a contract with the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State. For purposes of this subsection, the term “information security” means activities carried out in order to identify and address the vulnerabilities of a government computer, computer system, or computer network.

(f) Reverse Engineering. — (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure, in order to enable the identification and analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title.

(3) The information acquired through the acts permitted under paragraph (1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be made available to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be, provides such information or means solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs, and to the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under this title or violate applicable law other than this section.

(4) For purposes of this subsection, the term “interoperability” means the ability of computer programs to exchange information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which has been exchanged.

(g) Encryption Research. —

(1) Definitions. — For purposes of this subsection —

(A) the term “encryption research” means activities necessary to identify and analyze flaws and vulnerabilities of encryption technologies applied to copyrighted works, if these activities are conducted to advance the state of knowledge in the field of encryption technology or to assist in the development of encryption products; and

(B) the term “encryption technology” means the scrambling and descrambling of information using mathematical formulas or algorithms.

(2) Permissible acts of encryption research. — Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), it is not a violation of that subsection for a person to circumvent a technological measure as applied to a copy, phonorecord, performance, or display of a published work in the course of an act of good faith encryption research if —

(A) the person lawfully obtained the encrypted copy, phonorecord, performance, or display of the published work;

(B) such act is necessary to conduct such encryption research;

(C) the person made a good faith effort to obtain authorization before the circumvention; and

(D) such act does not constitute infringement under this title or a violation of applicable law other than this section, including section 1030 of title 18 and those provisions of title 18 amended by the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986.

(3) Factors in determining exemption. — In determining whether a person qualifies for the exemption under paragraph (2), the factors to be considered shall include —

(A) whether the information derived from the encryption research was disseminated, and if so, whether it was disseminated in a manner reasonably calculated to advance the state of knowledge or development of encryption technology, versus whether it was disseminated in a manner that facilitates infringement under this title or a violation of applicable law other than this section, including a violation of privacy or breach of security;

(B) whether the person is engaged in a legitimate course of study, is employed, or is appropriately trained or experienced, in the field of encryption technology; and

(C) whether the person provides the copyright owner of the work to which the technological measure is applied with notice of the findings and documentation of the research, and the time when such notice is provided.

(4) Use of technological means for research activities. — Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(2), it is not a violation of that subsection for a person to —

(A) develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological measure for the sole purpose of that person performing the acts of good faith encryption research described in paragraph (2); and

(B) provide the technological means to another person with whom he or she is working collaboratively for the purpose of conducting the acts of good faith encryption research described in paragraph (2) or for the purpose of having that other person verify his or her acts of good faith encryption research described in paragraph (2).

(5) Report to Congress. — Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this chapter, the Register of Copyrights and the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce shall jointly report to the Congress on the effect this subsection has had on —

(A) encryption research and the development of encryption technology;

(B) the adequacy and effectiveness of technological measures designed to protect copyrighted works; and

(C) protection of copyright owners against the unauthorized access to their encrypted copyrighted works.

The report shall include legislative recommendations, if any.

(h) Exceptions Regarding Minors. — In applying subsection (a) to a component or part, the court may consider the necessity for its intended and actual incorporation in a technology, product, service, or device, which —

(1) does not itself violate the provisions of this title; and

(2) has the sole purpose to prevent the access of minors to material on the Internet.

(i) Protection of Personally Identifying Information. —

(1) Circumvention permitted. — Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), it is not a violation of that subsection for a person to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title, if —

(A) the technological measure, or the work it protects, contains the capability of collecting or disseminating personally identifying information reflecting the online activities of a natural person who seeks to gain access to the work protected;

(B) in the normal course of its operation, the technological measure, or the work it protects, collects or disseminates personally identifying information about the person who seeks to gain access to the work protected, without providing conspicuous notice of such collection or dissemination to such person, and without providing such person with the capability to prevent or restrict such collection or dissemination;

(C) the act of circumvention has the sole effect of identifying and disabling the capability described in subparagraph (A), and has no other effect on the ability of any person to gain access to any work; and

(D) the act of circumvention is carried out solely for the purpose of preventing the collection or dissemination of personally identifying information about a natural person who seeks to gain access to the work protected, and is not in violation of any other law.

(2) Inapplicability to certain technological measures. —

This subsection does not apply to a technological measure, or a work it protects, that does not collect or disseminate personally identifying information and that is disclosed to a user as not having or using such capability.

(j) Security Testing. —

(1) Definition. — For purposes of this subsection, the term “security testing” means accessing a computer, computer system, or computer network, solely for the purpose of good faith testing, investigating, or correcting, a security flaw or vulnerability, with the authorization of the owner or operator of such computer, computer system, or computer network.

(2) Permissible acts of security testing. — Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), it is not a violation of that subsection for a person to engage in an act of security testing, if such act does not constitute infringement under this title or a violation of applicable law other than this section, including section 1030 of title 18 and those provisions of title 18 amended by the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986.

(3) Factors in determining exemption. — In determining whether a person qualifies for the exemption under paragraph (2), the factors to be considered shall include —

(A) whether the information derived from the security testing was used solely to promote the security of the owner or operator of such computer, computer system or computer network, or shared directly with the developer of such computer, computer system, or computer network; and

(B) whether the information derived from the security testing was used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate infringement under this title or a violation of applicable law other than this section, including a violation of privacy or breach of security.

(4) Use of technological means for security testing. — Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(2), it is not a violation of that subsection for a person to develop, produce, distribute or employ technological means for the sole purpose of performing the acts of security testing described in subsection (2), provided such technological means does not otherwise violate section (a)(2).

(k) Certain Analog Devices and Certain Technological Measures. —

(1) Certain analog devices. —

(A) Effective 18 months after the date of the enactment of this chapter, no person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in any —

(i) VHS format analog video cassette recorder unless such recorder conforms to the automatic gain control copy control technology;

(ii) 8mm format analog video cassette camcorder unless such camcorder conforms to the automatic gain control technology;

(iii) Beta format analog video cassette recorder, unless such recorder conforms to the automatic gain control copy control technology, except that this requirement shall not apply until there are 1,000 Beta format analog video cassette recorders sold in the United States in any one calendar year after the date of the enactment of this chapter;

(iv) 8mm format analog video cassette recorder that is not an analog video cassette camcorder, unless such recorder conforms to the automatic gain control copy control technology, except that this requirement shall not apply until there are 20,000 such recorders sold in the United States in any one calendar year after the date of the enactment of this chapter; or

(v) analog video cassette recorder that records using an NTSC format video input and that is not otherwise covered under clauses (i) through (iv), unless such device conforms to the automatic gain control copy control technology.

(B) Effective on the date of the enactment of this chapter, no person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic in —

(i) any VHS format analog video cassette recorder or any 8mm format analog video cassette recorder if the design of the model of such recorder has been modified after such date of enactment so that a model of recorder that previously conformed to the automatic gain control copy control technology no longer conforms to such technology; or

(ii) any VHS format analog video cassette recorder, or any 8mm format analog video cassette recorder that is not an 8mm analog video cassette camcorder, if the design of the model of such recorder has been modified after such date of enactment so that a model of recorder that previously conformed to the four-line colorstripe copy control technology no longer conforms to such technology.

Manufacturers that have not previously manufactured or sold a VHS format analog video cassette recorder, or an 8mm format analog cassette recorder, shall be required to conform to the four-line colorstripe copy control technology in the initial model of any such recorder manufactured after the date of the enactment of this chapter, and thereafter to continue conforming to the four-line colorstripe copy control technology. For purposes of this subparagraph, an analog video cassette recorder “conforms to” the four-line colorstripe copy control technology if it records a signal that, when played back by the playback function of that recorder in the normal viewing mode, exhibits, on a reference display device, a display containing distracting visible lines through portions of the viewable picture.

(2) Certain encoding restrictions. — No person shall apply the automatic gain control copy control technology or colorstripe copy control technology to prevent or limit consumer copying except such copying —

(A) of a single transmission, or specified group of transmissions, of live events or of audiovisual works for which a member of the public has exercised choice in selecting the transmissions, including the content of the transmissions or the time of receipt of such transmissions, or both, and as to which such member is charged a separate fee for each such transmission or specified group of transmissions;

(B) from a copy of a transmission of a live event or an audiovisual work if such transmission is provided by a channel or service where payment is made by a member of the public for such channel or service in the form of a subscription fee that entitles the member of the public to receive all of the programming contained in such channel or service;

(C) from a physical medium containing one or more prerecorded audiovisual works; or

(D) from a copy of a transmission described in subparagraph (A) or from a copy made from a physical medium described in subparagraph (C).

In the event that a transmission meets both the conditions set forth in subparagraph (A) and those set forth in subparagraph (B), the transmission shall be treated as a transmission described in subparagraph (A).

(3) Inapplicability. — This subsection shall not —

(A) require any analog video cassette camcorder to conform to the automatic gain control copy control technology with respect to any video signal received through a camera lens;

(B) apply to the manufacture, importation, offer for sale, provision of, or other trafficking in, any professional analog video cassette recorder; or

(C) apply to the offer for sale or provision of, or other trafficking in, any previously owned analog video cassette recorder, if such recorder was legally manufactured and sold when new and not subsequently modified in violation of paragraph (1)(B).

(4) Definitions. — For purposes of this subsection:

(A) An “analog video cassette recorder” means a device that records, or a device that includes a function that records, on electromagnetic tape in an analog format the electronic impulses produced by the video and audio portions of a television program, motion picture, or other form of audiovisual work.

(B) An “analog video cassette camcorder” means an analog video cassette recorder that contains a recording function that operates through a camera lens and through a video input that may be connected with a television or other video playback device.

(C) An analog video cassette recorder “conforms” to the automatic gain control copy control technology if it —

(i) detects one or more of the elements of such technology and does not record the motion picture or transmission protected by such technology; or

(ii) records a signal that, when played back, exhibits a meaningfully distorted or degraded display.

(D) The term “professional analog video cassette recorder” means an analog video cassette recorder that is designed, manufactured, marketed, and intended for use by a person who regularly employs such a device for a lawful business or industrial use, including making, performing, displaying, distributing, or transmitting copies of motion pictures on a commercial scale.

(E) The terms “VHS format,” “8mm format,” “Beta format,” “automatic gain control copy control technology,” “colorstripe copy control technology,” “four-line version of the colorstripe copy control technology,” and “NTSC” have the meanings that are commonly understood in the consumer electronics and motion picture industries as of the date of the enactment of this chapter.

(5) Violations. — Any violation of paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be treated as a violation of subsection (b)(1) of this section. Any violation of paragraph (2) of this subsection shall be deemed an “act of circumvention” for the purposes of section 1203(c)(3)(A) of this chapter.


Here's the site where I obtained these laws:

http://www.copyright.gov/

Relevant Chapter's:

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#504
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap12.html#1201

All Chapter's can be found here:

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 01:31:29 pm by Seph »

Seph

  • Iokan (+1)
  • *
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #147 on: May 17, 2009, 12:53:53 pm »
I found something else that leads me to believe Square has made a legit claim, but I hope I'm wrong seeing as how you were going to release it as free I just might be wrong.

(3) Existing derivative works. —

(A) In the case of a derivative work that is based upon a restored work and is created —

(i) before the date of the enactment of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, if the source country of the restored work is an eligible country on such date, or

(ii) before the date on which the source country of the restored work becomes an eligible country, if that country is not an eligible country on such date of enactment,

a reliance party may continue to exploit that derivative work for the duration of the restored copyright if the reliance party pays to the owner of the restored copyright reasonable compensation for conduct which would be subject to a remedy for infringement but for the provisions of this paragraph.

(B) In the absence of an agreement between the parties, the amount of such compensation shall be determined by an action in United States district court, and shall reflect any harm to the actual or potential market for or value of the restored work from the reliance party's continued exploitation of the work, as well as compensation for the relative contributions of expression of the author of the restored work and the reliance party to the derivative work.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Notices of intent served on a reliance party. —

(A) Notices of intent to enforce a restored copyright may be served on a reliance party at any time after the date of restoration of the restored copyright.[/i]

(B) Notices of intent to enforce a restored copyright served on a reliance party shall be signed by the owner or the owner's agent, shall identify the restored work and the work in which the restored work is used, if any, in detail sufficient to identify them, and shall include an English translation of the title, any other alternative titles known to the owner by which the work may be identified, the use or uses to which the owner objects, and an address and telephone number at which the reliance party may contact the owner. If the notice is signed by an agent, the agency relationship must have been constituted in writing and signed by the owner before service of the notice.

(3) Effect of material false statements. — Any material false statement knowingly made with respect to any restored copyright identified in any notice of intent shall make void all claims and assertions made with respect to such restored copyright.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works38

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

(2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;

(4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly;

(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly; and

(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) subject to the limitations set forth in section 113(d), shall have the right —

(A) to prevent any intentional distortion, mutilation, or other modification of that work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation, and any intentional distortion, mutilation, or modification of that work is a violation of that right, and

(B) to prevent any destruction of a work of recognized stature, and any intentional or grossly negligent destruction of that work is a violation of that right.


These have been pulled from all over that page if you want the whole page you must click the link:

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#102

God let me be wrong.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2009, 01:24:56 pm by Seph »

MDenham

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Chronopolitan (+300)
  • *
  • Posts: 330
  • Glowsticks are not a weapon.
    • View Profile
    • Java IRC - konata.echoes-online.com
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #148 on: May 17, 2009, 03:25:45 pm »
On the plus side (and keep in mind that this, once again, is neither legal advice nor a reasonable substitute thereof), screwing around with SNES ROMs themselves does not get us in trouble (see 1201(a)(3)(B) and then realize that if it were applied to ROMs, it also applies to any storage medium that doesn't encrypt its contents).

Crono as Glenn

  • Iokan (+1)
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: C&D: Director's Response
« Reply #149 on: May 17, 2009, 05:12:31 pm »
I don't know if this was posted on this site but on Arc Forums this suspicious person posted this email


http://kagerostudios.b1.jcink.com/index.php?showtopic=330&st=120&#entry15931

is the topic

Alienat0r is the poster, the Email is under the spoiler tags.