Законность данного сервера!

What to do if you are harassed?

Ask for specifics as to why your actions are in their eyes illegal. Specifics of how it is that you broke the law. Specifics of which patents it is that you have infringed upon. Look those patents up in the patent office and see exactly what it is that they have protected.

Most likely it is all a bullying tactic .. In which case ... Tell them that what you are doing is not illega, and forward them a copy of the Sony v. Connectix case at the US Federal Court of Appeals (second highest court in the country).

Should they choose to continue their harassment, then you need to make sure that you are rich so that you can afford the court battle.

What to do if you are sued?

Find a lawyer that specialized in copyright lawsuits, digital millenium copyright cases, and has expertise with cases such as Sony v. Connectix, Atari v. Nintendo, Accolade v. Sega, AOL v. FCC, etc.

Pay him a lot of money, and go to court .. Maybe you can find a way to countersue for damages, and get rich off that ... It's the American Way ...

I posted this on the Freya forums a couple of days ago, because I was sick of everyone saying that they are in fact - written in stone - illegal. So I decided I might as well copy this over here to respond to this issue ...

So here it goes ..

Are RO Emulators Illegal?

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.bitlaw.com/source/17usc/107.html">http://www.bitlaw.com/source/17usc/107.html</a>

Non-Profit, Educational Purpose
Not sure how to answer that, but it might be an issue, i doubt it though because the more "intellectual" properties such as graphics, etc were not reproduced, and neither was the code (AEGIS) copied.
Code not used from AEGIS.
Granted it might affect the market (free vs p2p), but which one of these private servers can handle more than 50 players? compare that to the thousands that Gravity can support. Don't see this as hurting Gravity's income. Not to mention that the court would weigh this against the fact that it provides alternative options for consumers (anti-monopoly theory)

Update: Here is a better example

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.goodwinprocter.com/publications..._h_09_23_02.pdf">http://www.goodwinprocter.com/publicati ... _23_02.pdf</a>

QUOTE
"But the copyright laws provide a defense for fair use. Determining whether a use is fair for purposes of this defense is often complex, but some courts have ruled that reverse engineering for developing products that are interoperable with the copyrighted program is fair, at least where it is the only way to uncover those elements of the program that are not copyrightable."

To sum it up, it is illegal to reverse engineer AEGIS for the purpose of creating a competing product, but it is legal to reverse engineer RO Client in hopes of creating a product that is compatible with it regardless of whether or not it is similar to AEGIS.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.lgu.com/publications/softcopy/22.shtml">http://www.lgu.com/publications/softcopy/22.shtml</a>

QUOTE
Another difference in the facts of the two cases contributed to the holding against Atari. In the Sega case Accolade had copied only the 25 byte code segment necessary for its game cartridges to work on the Sega consoles. The court viewed this as an unprotected functional element of the program, which Accolade was entitled to copy.

In the Nintendo case Atari did not copy the security code itself, but rather the program which generated the security code. The court held that this program reflected "creative organization" not required by external factors, noting that there were a "multitude of different ways to generate a data stream" which would unlock Nintendo's consoles. Because Atari had copied a computer program protected by copyright law, it had infringed Nintendo's program.

So it appears that Accolade was allowed to make cartridges that could be used with the Sega console despite Sega's approval. Although it required reverse engineering the security code, it was approved by the courts.

Atari was not allowed to copy the actual code for Nintendo's program that generated the data stream because a program could be made in any of many ways to emulate (generate) that data stream.

I know it sounds all nice to say that this is all illegal, especially since y*** shut down and Gravity is hunting everybody down, but the truth is I don't believe it. Even in my Data classes in Computer Science department at college, the teacher has specifically said that reverse engineering is legal provided that it is done for educational reasons to understand how it works. However the work may not actually be copied.

If it is in fact true that emulators are illegal because they use RO's communications protocol and interact with the client, then how do you explain the case between AOL and the Free IM situation.

--

AOL was ordered to open their instant messaging protocol(s) to the public.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/2/15/163349/048">http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/2/15/163349/048</a>

QUOTE
Somewhere during July of 2001 AOL was ordered to open their instant messaging protocol(s) to the public. The order from the FCC came shortly after their acquisition of the ICQ network. At the center of the debate is whether AOL has done enough to promote interoperability.

Trillian, Odigo, GAIM, etc. all use the oscar protocol to communicate with AIM. AOL continually modified their protocol. Shouldn't they have been illegal? The FCC didn't think so, ordering them to open their protocol to the public.

So it seems Gravity does not necessarily own their protocol, as any form of communication in the United States is owned by the FCC.

--

Well yes it is true emulators required a modified client. But that does not make emulators illegal. Is it illegal to modify your playstation? Maybe, but it is legal to buy a modchip ... Also equipment like GameSharks, Game Genies, etc. modify the intended use of the hardware and software, but those are also legal to buy ... I have no clue if they are legal to use ...

I'm going to stick with my Kazaa arguement .. If Gravity wants to stop the illegal use of their client, they need to sue the users, not the servers.

--

Sony vs. Connectix VGS
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.worldofspectrum.org/EmuFAQ2000/...2KAddendum1.htm">http://www.worldofspectrum.org/EmuFAQ20 ... endum1.htm</a>
<a class="postlink" href="http://digital-law-online.info/cases/53PQ2D1705.htm">http://digital-law-online.info/cases/53PQ2D1705.htm</a>

QUOTE
We can not deny that a Sony Playstation emulator is designed to play Sony Playstation Games which Sony claims may only be run on Sony Playstations and no other machine.

We also don't deny that the Connectix VGS (emulator) had to reverse engineer the Sony Playstation BIOS in order to create its own software which may or may not include the BIOS code.

The outcome was that the court favored Connectix VGS.

QUOTE
The intermediate copies made and used by Connectix during the course of its reverse engineering of the Sony [PlayStation] BIOS were protected fair use, necessary to permit Connectix to make its non-infringing Virtual Game Station function with PlayStation games. Any other intermediate copies made by Connectix [of the BIOS] do not support injunctive relief, even if those copies were infringing.

QUOTE
True, Connectix engineers admitted to combining the Sony BIOS with the Virtual Game Station hardware emulation software to test and develop the hardware emulation software. But in drafting the Connectix BIOS, Connectix engineers never claimed to do anything other than write their own code, even though they used, observed, copied and sometimes disassembled the Sony BIOS as they did so. Sony presents no evidence to the contrary, nor does Sony contend that Connectix’s final product contains infringing material.

QUOTE
Sony v. Connectix is the single most important court decision to date concerning the legality of emulation. It has established beyond a shadow of a doubt the legality of the technology within the bounds of intellectual property law.

QUOTE
This decision was issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals - not a federal district court, nor a state court, nor a local court. There is only one federal court higher than the Court of Appeals, and that is the U.S. Supreme Court.

And what happened then? Sony bought the VGS from Connectix to end it. Maybe if the Y*** team had gone to court they could have made some nice cash.

--

JackpotSK8

Е***Ь!!!! ПЕРЕВЕДИТЕ!!!!!!

Rags

emm, ti naverno poshutil, za takoi perevod 50$ min ^^
a vobshe govorit o zakonnosti emulatorov, v tom chisle RO...

DrBenway

да вообще говорить о законности ПО, теб боле в России

SlideR

Вот лол тему по русски написал а потом как пошпарил на иврите =)))))))))))

_КуКК_

@"SlideR":
Вот лол тему по русски написал а потом как пошпарил на иврите =)))))))))))

Слайдэр, а ты случайно не из Израиля ?

SlideR

Для слепых в локэйшене написано - Saint Petersburg - если тебе ето не очем не говорит сочувствую =)))

_КуКК_

@"SlideR":
Для слепых в локэйшене написано - Saint Petersburg - если тебе ето не очем не говорит сочувствую =)))

у меня с этим проблема, пасиба что сочувствуеш