Overlawyered: Chronicling The High Cost Of Our Legal System

Taking anti-hacking law too far?

Arguing for a temporary restraining order in a civil dispute, lawyers for Sony argue that the federal “anti-hacking” law prohibits unauthorized access to one’s own computer. (As commenters point out, the company may also have less controversial arguments based on other areas of law, such as intellectual property and contract.) [Orin Kerr]

Filed under:

4 Comments

  • By Sony’s attorneys putting in such an absurd argument, the judge should impose the sanction of invalidating the ENTIRE contract and licensing agreement and tossing the case. Clearly there was not a “meeting of the minds.”

    • By VMS

  • Apparently the judge denied the temporary restraining order.

    Sony makes the absurd argument that because the code allows the owner to access pirated software, that is the only thing the code is good for. That is patently false and Sony knows it. Users were very upset when Sony blocked the PS3 from running a Linux partition after the unit was sold to them. The hack also allows the playing of pre-PS3 games (games from the PS) that the PS3 does not allow.

  • Let’s not forget the US Military who’d been building Linux parallel processing arrays out of the boxes for custom simulation software.

    I wonder if the DoD will step in behind the guy. Wouldn’t that be a hoot!

    • By Keith D

  • People misunderstand S/W copyright, in my NSHO. Not least, the government.

    If I buy a copy of your software, it (that copy) belongs to ME. And since it’s MY property, I can do any damn thing I like to it EXCEPT reproduce it (make a copy). Hence the name.

    Tear it up, disassemble, hack, crack or flibbertigibbet, it’s MY copy to use, abuse or destroy. If that don’t suit you, don’t sell me a copy.

    • By mojo