Blizzard sends DMCA takedown to Stealthbot host's host

[Stealth]

On topic, Blizzard has sent me an e-mail thanking me for my cooperation and stating that no further action is required on my part. I've asked permission to make the correspondence between the Anti-Piracy Department and myself available to read so I'll let you know if that becomes available.

[Archangel]

E-Mails avaible at: http://www.stealthbot.net/legal/

[Soul Taker]

I don't get those e-mails at all.  They say that you are hosting a hack, which I too thought was a copy and pasted response.  But then they are satisfied because you removed only one mirror?  Seems really weird to me.

[Stealth]

I don't get those e-mails at all.  They say that you are hosting a hack, which I too thought was a copy and pasted response.  But then they are satisfied because you removed only one mirror?  Seems really weird to me.

I gave them an easy way out -- by complying with their e-mail and being very calm and reasonable with them they analyzed things further and decided they had no legal recourse. Since I was compliant with their original request they simply thanked me for cooperating and backed down.

[Blaze]

Are they going after any of the other links to stealthbot?

[AC_Drkan]

Also a post i made on your forums.

Blizz may have thought that you reverse enginered their SC/BW client.

[Blaze]

Whats wrong with reverse engineering the game? Its allowed legally isn't it?

[MyndFyre]

Whats wrong with reverse engineering the game? Its allowed legally isn't it?

They don't permit it in their EULA, which is supposedly a "contract"

[tA-Kane]

Except that in some countries, reverse engineering is specifically allowed by law.

[Ban]

What countries are these?

[Arta]

It's allowed here (UK), with some restrictions. You're allowed to reverse engineer for interoperability, but only if the information you need isn't publicly available.

[MyndFyre]

What countries are these?

It is specifically allowed by law in the United States, as well.  Although, you're missing the point, Kane: the theory behind the EULA is that by using the software, you are agreeing to waive that right.  bnetd is basing their argument on the Supremacy Clause from the US Constitution -- that no state contract (which is what the EULA is) can supercede the federal statute (which is what the DMCA is, which permits reverse engineering for the purposes of creating interoperable products, among other reasons).

That is the legal battle that this case will come down to, and should it go to the Supreme Court (I believe it may), I believe the Supreme Court will rule in favor of bnetd in an effort to preserve federal power.

[edit]And on that note, perhaps we should move part of this thread to the Politics forum? [/edit]

[Stealth]

I don't believe the EULAs of Warcraft III and prior games forbid reverse-engineering or packetsniffing -- only WoW expressly forbids them both. The Battle.net EULA's third-party client clause is the one they could enforce, but on a user-by-user basis -- I can develop my software theoretically without ever connecting to Battle.net.

[Arta]

I asked my law prof if an EULA was an enforceable contract and he laughed

[R.a.B.B.i.T]

I don't believe the EULAs of Warcraft III and prior games forbid reverse-engineering or packetsniffing -- only WoW expressly forbids them both. The Battle.net EULA's third-party client clause is the one they could enforce, but on a user-by-user basis -- I can develop my software theoretically without ever connecting to Battle.net.

Partially true, Blizzard states that you cannot reverse engineer "downloaded content", so does that mean that you can't reverse a patched version of the game, since new data was downloaded?