4 ms·

What I take from the description is that the defendant, Unigate Enterprise (UE), used the software (SDS/2) to produce drawings for its Chinese contractors. The

What I take from the description is that the defendant, Unigate Enterprise (UE), used the software (SDS/2) to produce drawings for its Chinese contractors. The drawings are in a proprietary file format that can only be viewed by SDS/2 (written by Design Data Corporation (DDC)). Chinese contractors use illegal copies of SDS/2 to view the drawings. So yes, the Chinese have broken the law. It's Unigate's problem that they chose software that produces files that can't be openly shared. In claiming that the output is copyrighted, DDC seems to be resorting to a last-ditch (and groundless) effort to sue their American client, UE, because they have little prospect of getting anything out of the Chinese. Bottom line: [1] Somebody broke the law. [2] It has little to do with copyrighting a program's output.

macmac 10y ago
Those are not the facts. UE didn't use SDS/2. They subcontracted work that requires the use of SDS/2 to a Chinese subcontractor who used an allegedly pirated copy of SDS/2 to do the work. It has to do with copyright in program output because that is what DDC is claiming. I would agree that the claim in this case is weak but it is before the 9th Circuit and their opinion is going to be very interesting either way.
- conistonwater 10y ago
  Doesn't this bit also matter? > Judge Callahan and Judge Hurwitz were both troubled by the fact that UE had advertised on its site that it used the SDS/2 software. UE’s counsel answered that UE was counting on contractors to use it, but admitted that UE had never asked DDC if it was indeed true that the contractors were legally using the software.
  - macmac 10y ago
    It matters to the question of whether or not UE contributed to copyright infringement, not to the question of copyright in the output of the SDS/2 software.
  - PostOnce 10y ago
    Is it normal to contact vendors of software you use to find out if your contractors are also legally using it?

macmac 10y ago

Those are not the facts. UE didn't use SDS/2. They subcontracted work that requires the use of SDS/2 to a Chinese subcontractor who used an allegedly pirated copy of SDS/2 to do the work. It has to do with copyright in program output because that is what DDC is claiming. I would agree that the claim in this case is weak but it is before the 9th Circuit and their opinion is going to be very interesting either way.

conistonwater 10y ago
Doesn't this bit also matter? > Judge Callahan and Judge Hurwitz were both troubled by the fact that UE had advertised on its site that it used the SDS/2 software. UE’s counsel answered that UE was counting on contractors to use it, but admitted that UE had never asked DDC if it was indeed true that the contractors were legally using the software.
- macmac 10y ago
  It matters to the question of whether or not UE contributed to copyright infringement, not to the question of copyright in the output of the SDS/2 software.
- PostOnce 10y ago
  Is it normal to contact vendors of software you use to find out if your contractors are also legally using it?