Courts Should Reject Blizzard's Assault on the First Sale Doctrine

from the contract-or-copyright? dept

We've written before about the ongoing fight over the legal status of end-user license agreements. Many software companies have tried to claim that breaking an EULA is copyright infringement, which often carries harsher penalties and stronger remedies than mere breaches of contract. The courts have generally resisted these arguments, holding that a copyright holder cannot expand the scope of copyright simply by attaching a "license" to its products. The Electronic Frontier Foundation points to the latest skirmish in this debate: Blizzard has taken the position that using a piece of software called Glider to cheat in World of Warcraft is not only contrary to the game's license agreement but is copyright infringement as well. Indeed, on Blizzard's theory, any violation of the license agreement would constitute copyright infringement.

Public Knowledge has submitted a brief in the case pointing out the real problems the courts would cause if they accepted Blizzard's argument. For example, among the terms of the World of Warcraft license are rules about what you can name your in-game characters. Blizzard's theory would mean that if you choose a name that violates those rules (such as naming your character after a "popular culture figure, celebrity, or media personality"), you would not only get kicked out of the game, but you would be liable for copyright infringement too! This is plainly not how copyright is supposed to work, and PK rightly urges the court to reject Blizzard's over-reaching argument. Perhaps most troubling, accepting Blizzard's argument would mean that software vendors would have the power to dictate who may make software that interoperates with their products. Outside of the much-reviled DMCA, copyright law has never given software vendors this kind of control, and there's no good reason to start now.

Filed Under: copyright, eula, first sale, world of warcraft
Companies: blizzard, eff

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 26 May 2008 @ 1:42pm

    Now this brings us to the third part

    Cheat: "to act dishonestly to gain an advantage". Breaking the rules does not mean you are necessary cheating. For example if you go competitive bike riding you may be required to wear highly visible clothing and helmet for your saftey. If you dont wear it you are breaking the rule but by no way are you cheating.

    So what advantage was gained? You don't own your lvl 80 character blizzard does.. You have absouletly nothing. And no other players are any worse off becuase you used a bot because all other players have nothing as well. Their characters are worthing nothing.
    If you own nothing, and get nothing more of a favourable outcome for using it then no cheating occured.

    At the end of the day using a bot to play wow is no different than using a dishwasher to wash my dishes..

    This isnt CS: source where you can shoot them in the head through the wall kind of stuff, or use an aimbot.

    At the end of the day the ultra-rare magically sword is worth nothing, and no-one cares until you stab someone for it, as history proves.

    Conclusion is you cant cheat on nothing to gain an non-existent/intangible advantage on nothing.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.