Sunncomm backs down from shift key lawsuit

Starbucks · 10th October 2003, 20:59

Quote:

IT SEEMS that Sunncomm, which wanted to throw the book at a student for describing a method using the SHIFT key to circumvent its copy protection, has backed off, probably sensing the full blown mess of a PR Catastrophe.

John Halderman published his findings on Sunncomm's Media Max software and was threatened with prosecution under DMCA legislation, but according to Broadband Reports, pointing to Professor Edward Felten's blog, here, Sunncomm has seen sense and decided not to sue the chap instead.

I didn't think they would get very far either. :-/

baafie · 10th October 2003, 21:16

Beat you again.

http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....33#post1120133

Starbucks · 10th October 2003, 23:39

No you only beat me this time! Mine was made 3 days earlier:

http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....ight=shift+key

baafie · 11th October 2003, 01:16

In fact, no.

The thread you are referring to is one that describes the discovery of the circumvention of the copyright protection system. This was before posted by by Mike Darrah on October 07, 2003 @ 08:37 AM - at least 12 hours before you posted it in GD. This was the first instance of 'defeat'

Next, I posted that SunnComm planned to sue the student for publishing his discovery. You then went on to post the exact same thing in GD, soon after which it was locked. That would be the second instance.

The third instance would be this thread, in which you post that SunnComm dropped their intentions to sue the student. I however, posted the same thing in the same thread I previously created, here.

Concluding: you were beaten three times, first by Mike, and two times by your truly

Starbucks · 11th October 2003, 01:34

Mean!

baafie · 11th October 2003, 06:01

Awww

Starbucks · 11th October 2003, 06:53

Is that your cat? She's a cute one.

baafie · 11th October 2003, 15:38

Not mine no.. I have one just like it, but not as cute

Starbucks · 11th October 2003, 17:44

You are still an ass though..

baafie · 12th October 2003, 13:04

You sound as if you know me.

vrapp · 12th October 2003, 15:42

If holding down SHIFT key circumvents the protection, then it could not be a security hole, an oversight. This had to be programmed intentinally by the developers of the software. If so, this is not a circumvention but intended functionality - though probably not published. Sunncomm first programmed this capability in the software, and then tried to sue the guy who discovered it.

Starbucks · 12th October 2003, 20:40

Are these people retards? The problem isn't people copying CD's, it's copying mp3's. This "technology" screws the people who buy the CD. Someone's going to get sued.

c2R · 12th October 2003, 22:41

Quote:

Originally posted by vrapp
If holding down SHIFT key circumvents the protection, then it could not be a security hole, an oversight. This had to be programmed intentinally by the developers of the software. If so, this is not a circumvention but intended functionality - though probably not published. Sunncomm first programmed this capability in the software, and then tried to sue the guy who discovered it.

No, Windows allows the shift key to be pressed to stop exactly this sort of crap being installed onto your PC when a disc is inserted.

xzxzzx · 13th October 2003, 17:03

Seems to me that the CD protection itself would be illegal, as it installs software, unknown to the system. Sounds like a virus...

Let's see.

Virus:

n. A program or piece of code that is loaded onto your computer without your knowledge and runs against your wishes.

Sounds like a virus to me. But do THEY get sued? Nooo. Of course not. They're just protecting their copyright, so I can only listen to cross-coded crap on my iPod or whatever Mp3 player.

spookz · 14th October 2003, 19:15

German-based media giant Bertelsmann Group has launched a 400 million dollar lawsuit against major hardware manufacturers, alleging they traffic in banned circumvention devices that can be used to illegally copy their music CDs. It says that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act entitles it to protection from devices that can be used to circumvent its technological protections against piracy. Specifically, it demands compensation for the inclusion of "Shift" buttons on standard computer keyboards.

Papers filed today in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, CA, allege that nine hardware manufacturers based in Taiwan, Korea, Japan, and the US violated section 1201(c) of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act or DMCA by manufacturing and selling a variety of input devices containing the device, which BMG describes an illegal lock-pick specifically designed for its copyrighted works.

The lawsuit came after the revelation Wednesday that BMG's anti-ripping software for music CDs can be circumvented by depressing the Shift key while inserting the disc. An industry spokesman strenuously denied that their products were intended for such use, but BMG says that's not relevant. "The [DMCA] bans the traffic in any technology with no significant purpose other than circumvention," said BMG Public Affairs Director Martin Helmsholtz. When a reporter asked if writing capital letters was not a significant purpose, Hemsholtz replied 'WHAT DO YOU THINK CAPS LOCK IS FOR/'.

Legal insiders say BMG's case may be stronger than one might think. "The Universal v. Reimerdes decision is pretty clear," said Daniel Rueben of Harvard law school, referring to the first significant DMCA lawsuit. "You can cross the line just by explaining how something works, or telling someone where to find out how something works. I'm surprised that IBM wasn't named for its keyboard input standard, which includes the shift keycode."

The suit is supported by the Recording Industry Association of America, which includes all major music labels. RIAA president Jack Valenti slammed keyboard companies for what he called "the next thing to armed robbery", adding that "They even put two of these keys on each model, and make them two or three times as large so you can't miss it. That's not incitement to piracy?"

A preliminary hearing is scheduled for the 12th of December.

baafie · 14th October 2003, 19:20

lol

cyph3r4rc4n3 · 14th October 2003, 19:50

something like this just goes to show you that some conglomerates will do anything to subdue free speech

DJHotIce · 14th October 2003, 20:47

ON the virus topic, that is illegal and it probally doesn't state on the cd 'This program will install software to encrypt the song after its use, Opening this package means you understand these rights'

13th October 2003, 17:03	#14
xzxzzx Forum King Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 7,267	Seems to me that the CD protection itself would be illegal, as it installs software, unknown to the system. Sounds like a virus... Let's see. Virus: n. A program or piece of code that is loaded onto your computer without your knowledge and runs against your wishes. Sounds like a virus to me. But do THEY get sued? Nooo. Of course not. They're just protecting their copyright, so I can only listen to cross-coded crap on my iPod or whatever Mp3 player. Freedom of speech is the basic freedom of humanity. When you've lost that, you've lost everything. 1\/\/4y 34\|<$p4y 1gp4y 33714y, 0d4y 0uy4y? \| Roses are #FF0000; Violets are #0000FF; chown -R ${YOU} ~/base The DMCA. It really is that bad. : Count for your life.

14th October 2003, 19:15	#15
spookz Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: los angeles Posts: 351	German-based media giant Bertelsmann Group has launched a 400 million dollar lawsuit against major hardware manufacturers, alleging they traffic in banned circumvention devices that can be used to illegally copy their music CDs. It says that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act entitles it to protection from devices that can be used to circumvent its technological protections against piracy. Specifically, it demands compensation for the inclusion of "Shift" buttons on standard computer keyboards. Papers filed today in the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, CA, allege that nine hardware manufacturers based in Taiwan, Korea, Japan, and the US violated section 1201(c) of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act or DMCA by manufacturing and selling a variety of input devices containing the device, which BMG describes an illegal lock-pick specifically designed for its copyrighted works. The lawsuit came after the revelation Wednesday that BMG's anti-ripping software for music CDs can be circumvented by depressing the Shift key while inserting the disc. An industry spokesman strenuously denied that their products were intended for such use, but BMG says that's not relevant. "The [DMCA] bans the traffic in any technology with no significant purpose other than circumvention," said BMG Public Affairs Director Martin Helmsholtz. When a reporter asked if writing capital letters was not a significant purpose, Hemsholtz replied 'WHAT DO YOU THINK CAPS LOCK IS FOR/'. Legal insiders say BMG's case may be stronger than one might think. "The Universal v. Reimerdes decision is pretty clear," said Daniel Rueben of Harvard law school, referring to the first significant DMCA lawsuit. "You can cross the line just by explaining how something works, or telling someone where to find out how something works. I'm surprised that IBM wasn't named for its keyboard input standard, which includes the shift keycode." The suit is supported by the Recording Industry Association of America, which includes all major music labels. RIAA president Jack Valenti slammed keyboard companies for what he called "the next thing to armed robbery", adding that "They even put two of these keys on each model, and make them two or three times as large so you can't miss it. That's not incitement to piracy?" A preliminary hearing is scheduled for the 12th of December. sPooKZ

14th October 2003, 20:47	#18
DJHotIce Forum Loser (Forum King) Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: That place I can't remember the name. Posts: 4,617	ON the virus topic, that is illegal and it probally doesn't state on the cd 'This program will install software to encrypt the song after its use, Opening this package means you understand these rights' -DJHotIce Bounce Multimedia - Professional Web Design

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10th October 2003, 21:16	#2
baafie feminazi (Major Dude) Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 1,768	Beat you again. http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....33#post1120133

10th October 2003, 23:39	#3
Starbucks Forum King Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Forums Posts: 2,685	No you only beat me this time! Mine was made 3 days earlier: http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....ight=shift+key

11th October 2003, 01:16	#4
baafie feminazi (Major Dude) Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 1,768	In fact, no. The thread you are referring to is one that describes the discovery of the circumvention of the copyright protection system. This was before posted by by Mike Darrah on October 07, 2003 @ 08:37 AM - at least 12 hours before you posted it in GD. This was the first instance of 'defeat' Next, I posted that SunnComm planned to sue the student for publishing his discovery. You then went on to post the exact same thing in GD, soon after which it was locked. That would be the second instance. The third instance would be this thread, in which you post that SunnComm dropped their intentions to sue the student. I however, posted the same thing in the same thread I previously created, here. Concluding: you were beaten three times, first by Mike, and two times by your truly

11th October 2003, 01:34	#5
Starbucks Forum King Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Forums Posts: 2,685	Mean!

11th October 2003, 06:01	#6
baafie feminazi (Major Dude) Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 1,768	Awww

11th October 2003, 06:53	#7
Starbucks Forum King Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Forums Posts: 2,685	Is that your cat? She's a cute one.

11th October 2003, 15:38	#8
baafie feminazi (Major Dude) Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 1,768	Not mine no.. I have one just like it, but not as cute

11th October 2003, 17:44	#9
Starbucks Forum King Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Forums Posts: 2,685	You are still an ass though..

12th October 2003, 13:04	#10
baafie feminazi (Major Dude) Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 1,768	You sound as if you know me.

12th October 2003, 15:42	#11
vrapp Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Posts: 10	If holding down SHIFT key circumvents the protection, then it could not be a security hole, an oversight. This had to be programmed intentinally by the developers of the software. If so, this is not a circumvention but intended functionality - though probably not published. Sunncomm first programmed this capability in the software, and then tried to sue the guy who discovered it.

12th October 2003, 20:40	#12
Starbucks Forum King Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Forums Posts: 2,685	Are these people retards? The problem isn't people copying CD's, it's copying mp3's. This "technology" screws the people who buy the CD. Someone's going to get sued.

14th October 2003, 19:20	#16
baafie feminazi (Major Dude) Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 1,768	lol

14th October 2003, 19:50	#17
cyph3r4rc4n3 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Joliet, IL, USA Posts: 7	something like this just goes to show you that some conglomerates will do anything to subdue free speech