A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case

Posted Oct 4, 2004 11:51 UTC (Mon) by dps (guest, #5725)
In reply to: A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case by job
Parent article: A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case

I am still not a lwayer, but generally rights are things you keep anyway. You can claim in an EULA that my rights under the sale of goods and services act do not apply. If I demand my rights under the act, this clause will not help you---those rights can not be eliminated.

If the EUCD says reverse engineering, for the satted purposes, is a right then you probably can ignore any language that says it is not allowed. Legal advice in Which? consistently if that you can ignore the "by openning this envelope" language, because it has no legal force whatsoever.

I suspect that consumer protection legislation in the US gives you rights that no EULA can remove too. Whether or not you can override the DMCA "limited reverse engineering" section with contract law is not something I am in a position to say,

A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case

Posted Oct 4, 2004 13:45 UTC (Mon) by job (guest, #670) [Link]

So what happens with licenses that tries to nullify my rights? Are the
licenses completely invalid, in which case what right to I have to use
the software at all? Or is there a "default license" in copyright law
that overrides it?

A ruling in the bnetd DMCA case

Posted Oct 4, 2004 15:22 UTC (Mon) by mmarsh (subscriber, #17029) [Link]

Unalienable rights can't be given away. Other rights can, such as the right to refuse to testify against yourself. That's a pretty fundamental right, but it's alienable. The right to reverse-engineer isn't nearly as fundamental, however important we feel it is. Even freedom of speech is alienable, as NDAs demonstrate.

Some jurisdictions have specific laws that nullify certain contract or license provisions that would otherwise give away "consumer" rights (I really hate that term). Whether reverse-engineering is so covered is another issue, and one about which I have no knowledge.