Bnetd
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The correct title of this article is bnetd. The initial letter is shown capitalized due to technical restrictions.
 |
This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. |
bnetd is an open source software package, released under the GNU General Public License, that provides a complete emulation of Blizzard Entertainment's battle.net service. The software allows users to create and play on their own set of servers, instead of relying on Blizzard's official servers. This is a benefit to players who want to play their Battle.net capable games online without encountering increasing lag and Internet bot usage. bnetd was reverse engineered from its Battle.net cousin, but unlike Battle.net, it lacks the ability to check clients for valid CD-Keys, thus allowing players running unauthorized copies of Battle.net capable games to access full multiplayer functionality.
Contents |
[edit] Vivendi Universal v. Jung
In February 2002, Blizzard threatened legal action against the developers of bnetd. Blizzard filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, alleging violations of their games' End User License Agreement (sometimes referred to as a clickwrap license), as well as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), in what would become an important test case for portions of that law. The Electronic Frontier Foundation mounted a defense, but the court granted Blizzard a summary judgement. On appeal, defendants argued that federal copyright law, which permits reverse engineering, preempts California state contract law, upon which the EULA's prohibition on reverse engineering is grounded.
In September 2005, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the defendants' argument and affirmed the lower court's decision. "Appellants failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to the applicability of the interoperability exception [of the DMCA]. The district court properly granted summary judgement in favor of Blizzard and Vivendi on the operability exception." The appeals court further ruled that bnetd circumvents copy protection in violation of the DMCA. (Eighth Circuit 2005)
As a result, the bnetd.org domain was transferred to Blizzard's control pursuant to the consent decree entered during the trial. As recently as January 2007, the domain was being redirected to Blizzard's battle.net website. Although Blizzard won the case, the lawsuit did not stop the continued distribution of bnetd's open source, nor of derivative projects such as PvPGN. Other hosts were quickly set up by third parties in countries where no anti-circumvention legislation equivalent to the DMCA exists.
[edit] Criticism
Many observers disagree with the court's technical findings. In particular, whether the battle.net modes of Blizzard's client programs are eligible for protection under the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause, or are uncopyrightable functional elements, remains a topic of debate in technology law.
This debate relates to the CD key's validity as a copyright access control subject to the DMCA's anti-circumvention clause. Lack of a valid CD key does not prevent the games in question from being copied, installed, or played in modes that do not involve battle.net servers. Further, battle.net administrators regularly disable CD keys to block suspected cheaters from the service. A player with a disabled CD key remains able to play independently of battle.net, such as in single player mode, or through a direct TCP/IP connection to another player. A player with unlicensed software is permitted to play on battle.net, so long as the player's CD key is valid and not in concurrent use by another player. This treatment of the CD key raises the question as to how much the CD key functions to protect the client software from unlicensed use, and how much it functions as copyright-blind permission to connect to the battle.net service.
There is also some doubt as to the ruling's sway in courts outside the Eighth Circuit. To illustrate, critics allege Blizzard forum shopped to keep the case out of the Ninth Circuit, despite all of the licenses involved in the lawsuit requiring claims to be filed in Los Angeles County, California. The Ninth Circuit, which includes California, where Blizzard Entertainment headquarters are located, built much of the case history protecting reverse engineering uses against copyright infringement and other claims (Sega v. Accolade, 1992; Sony v. Connectix, 2000).
[edit] Sources
- United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (2005). Davidson & Associates DBA Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.; Vivendi Universal Inc. v. Jung et al., 422 F.3d 630 (8th Cir. 2005). Accessed online on March 22, 2006. [1]
- United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1992). Sega Enterprises, Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) . Accessed at Digital Law Online on August 29, 2006. [2]
- United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2000). Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc.; Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc. v. Connectix Corporation, 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000). Accessed online on August 29, 2006. [3]
