roastedpeacock
Joined 5 years ago
Joined 5 years ago
Certain Japanese video-game companies would take issue with that interpretation of facts. Of course there is the arbitrary distinction between 'access' and 'copy' control mechanisms. Something arguably made irrelevant by the further integration of general concepts from personal-computing into certain video-game systems.
Even without supposed goodwill of AMD and seeing things a different way being a) affiliated with a university b) outside the USA may have changed some of the equation.
Afterwards several researchers investigated how to execute third-party code on the device and succeeded. [1] In response Sony did attempt to prosecute several people under DMCA and similar claims [2] and were more successful with certain defendants in some countries versus others.
[1] https://media.ccc.de/v/27c3-4087-en-console_hacking_2010 [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Computer_Entertainment_Am...
This is where I stand.
One can support the mission of the Internet Archive (in archiving the public internet) and still express concern over more legally questionable ventures that may threaten their existence (e.g digitising and redistributing owned copies of books) and may be more of a challenge being justified under the first-sale doctrine.
Considering the Lavabit case [1] this reek of grandstanding to anyone else? Not saying Europe is panacea but considering the unaccountability of American intelligence or law enforcement the European position does seem more favourable.
And to those who bring up policies such as Chat Control. The vote for that in Brussels has been postponed after enough outcry. [2] Hopefully it does not come back to life however them trying again under a different banner would not be a surprise either.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit#Connection_to_Edward_S...
[2] https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/chat-control-vote-postponed...
575C3ADAB97AD331CA41544ABBDE39538C0FDD59