16 ms·

Hacker Mods Old Calculator to Access the Internet, Casio Files DMCA Complaint

452 points by fraqed 6y ago

nomadluap 6y ago
Does anyone have a clone of the original repository?
- bhickey 6y ago
  Here's a fork https://github.com/rida1148/Hack-Casio-Calculator https://github.com/rida1148/Hack-Casio-Calculator
  - _sbrk 6y ago
    Don't you just love the Streissand effect? :-)
  - ngcc_hk 6y ago
    Original is back
- tzs 6y ago
  Just wait a few days and it will be back up. DMCA works like this: 1. Copyright owner sends a notice to hosting provider alleging infringement and asking for the content to be removed. 2. Hosting provider checks to make sure the notice has all the legally required items, and if so takes the content down and notifies the person who uploaded the content. 3. If the uploader feels the allegation is false, they send a notice back to the hosting provider stating this. 4. Hosting provider checks to make sure that notice also has all the legally required items. If it does, they hosting provider is required to put the content back up within a few days. 5. Hosting provider given the complainant the uploader's contact information. At that point the hosting provider is free of liability, even if the material is infringing. If the complainant wants it down, they have to sue the uploader directly. In this case, we are somewhere in step 4. It seems very unlikely that CASIO will actually sue, so once step 4 is complete that should be the end of this. You've probably seen many cases where DMCA did not work like this. What's generally happening there is that the hosting provider has implemented their own system for dealing with this things instead of following the DMCA procedure (hello, Google!). People tend to call any take down request a DMCA request regardless of whether or not the hosting provider actually uses the DMCA procedure.
robotmay 6y ago
This isn't the only bad PR tactic I've seen from Casio lately. There's a piano reviewer on YouTube who noticed a flaw in the action of a new digital piano they make, and their responses varied from claiming he was lying to _reportedly_ spamming his videos with negative comments. Here's the 3 relevant videos where he first raises the issue, responds to Casio, then just straight up dismantles the piano and proves it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7xHgXFEJUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7xHgXFEJUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAfScFK0QU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAfScFK0QU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqNK3w-2C6I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqNK3w-2C6I
- cosmojg 6y ago
  Whelp, Casio has officially made its way onto my list of brands to never buy.
  - squarefoot 6y ago
    You beat me to it. Using our wallet is the only type of reply businesses understand.
    - Klinky 6y ago
      That's like expecting a butterfly's wing flaps to stop a hurricane half-way across the world. A lot of businesses are actually incompetent at understanding the reasons consumers haven't bought their product. Naming and shaming on social media is more effective, but likely they'll just rebuff the claims and dump more money into marketing, as marketing is often very effective at covering up a shoddy product. Voting with your wallet is the weakest position. Make a lot of noise as to why you're voting with your wallet, so they get the message. However, in a lot of cases, they won't care, and your action is just a droplet in an ocean, inconsequential.
      - madacoo 6y ago
        So you're saying vote with your wallet but also publicise the fact you are so doing on social media? Isn't that exactly what the user you replied to did? How else could you have replied to them?
dukoid 6y ago
What are the penalties for wrong DMCA complaints?
- ikeboy 6y ago
  It's very difficult to establish the bad faith required to win a 512(f) misrepresentation case, but it's doable and you can win damages.
  - TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
    In the UK you could sue for libel, because this suit potentially defames the public character of the accused and could cause both personal and professional losses. It would put the burden of proof on Casio, requiring convincing proof that the claims in the lawsuit are true and neither vexatious nor frivolous. That would be interesting to watch, because I get the impression Casio's legal team have no idea what they're doing. They're really trying to protect Casio's status in exams, but to do that they're talking about source code and using the DMCA as a legal gambit. I doubt they're really interested in whether source code was used or even what source code is. Someone on the team thought "OK - sounds good - we can make that stick" and here we are. If it's really not true - which sounds likely, from the comments - it's sloppy and lazy work and leaves any number of open goals for countersuits.
    - ikeboy 6y ago
      In the US you only can't sue for libel because DMCA preempts all federal and state causes of action - instead you sue for misrepresentation under 512(f). But for false claims of infringement that don't involve copyright, a libel claim can work. I've previously mentioned my own 8 figure lawsuit against tp-link for false claims of counterfeiting; I have antitrust, tortious interference, declaratory judgement, and defamation (i.e. libel) causes of action. I know of at least one similar case with a multi-million dollar jury award from 1999 (see Alexander binzel v nu-tecsys.)
- cmiles74 6y ago
  Not much, the person accused would need to sue. https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/what_are_penalties_false_copyright_infringement_claims https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/what_a...
dylan604 6y ago
"This week REACT wrote to Github, "<snip> "CASIO may somehow feel it’s in the right here but it does seem just a little bit petty." More likely REACT reacted on their own as that's what their entire existence is about. This was probably yet again some lawyer working for the group that has no knowledge of coding, see's the trade name of a company they are representing, and took action. Of course, I'm just playing armchair QB and have no knowledge whatsoever either way. He said, EvilCorp said, He loses.
foobar_ 6y ago
Intellectual property is anti-competitive and monopolistic which is anti capitalistic. It started out as a reward system for authors and inventors. What we now have is an obscenity becauase we are rewarding corporations that neither produce nor invent anything. The legal loophole that a corporation is a person is false. Adam Smith did not have that in mind when he was extolling the virtues of capitalism. We need to force liability based capitalism without personhood and breakup all conglomerates.
- kube-system 6y ago
  People who have rights individually should still have those rights when they assemble. The practical consequences of removing personhood would be disastrous for the rights of individuals who work at a corporation and the rights of individuals who want to contract with a corporation. If you think it’s hard to sue a bad corporation now, just think about how hard it would be if you had to individually name each of the owners in a suit.
  - foobar_ 6y ago
    Find an email thread that links them ? For people thinking you need limited liability to be a big company ... you don't. Bloomberg is not an LLP as far as I know.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      Don’t think that thread exists for any public companies, most email servers can’t handle that many recipients. Bloomberg is an LP which must have at least one partner with limited liability.
elliekelly 6y ago
> Neutrino informs us that he has already filed a DMCA counternotice with Github to get his project back. I’m increasingly uncomfortable with the balance of knowledge/power/experience in the counter-notice process. The repo owner is at a huge disadvantage when going up against the experienced and expensive lawyers filing these claims. Even when the law is on the developer’s side it’s almost an unwinnable battle.
- ikeboy 6y ago
  In this case, Casio is unlikely to file a frivolous lawsuit, so the content will go back up. The only disadvantage is if the rights owner is willing to file a frivolous lawsuit, and in that scenario their lawyers can get sanctioned by the court. Look at e.g. Richard Leibowitz for an aggressive copyright attorney who's been sanctioned by various courts.
  - elliekelly 6y ago
    I don’t know much about the intricacies of the DMCA process but my understanding is that the counter-notice will put the content back up unless the original filer (in this case, Casio) provides proof they’ve filed suit. Is there anything stopping Casio from sending a strongly worded letter of their intent to file suit if the content isn’t removed? Is there anything stopping Casio from bringing suit, submitting the docket number to Github to have the content removed, and then withdrawing after 30 (or 60 or 90) days? Somewhat related, are there any transparency sites that track DMCA notices for which a counter-notice was filed and no suit was ever brought? To give the public an idea of which companies are most aggressively using takedown notices even where they might not feel they have much of a case.
    - ikeboy 6y ago
      1. It's unethical to threaten to sue without an actual intention of suing - lawyers can be disciplined for that. 2. Once you sue, you can't dismiss unilaterally once the other side has responded. They can reasonably say "we put money into fighting this - you can't withdraw unless you do it with prejudice, which means you can't bring the same suit again." If there's a dismissal of any kind, that could be submitted to GitHub and they'd be permitted to reinstate the content, unless the court specifically said otherwise. The statute doesn't explicitly say this, but it talks about a lawsuit being filed to restrain infringement - it's obvious that if such a lawsuit is dismissed then that provision is no longer satisfied. I'm satisfied any judge looking at this would agree with my interpretation.
daniel-thompson 6y ago
It's shitty behavior, for sure, but it's rational given what I assume to be their incentive: to stay in the good graces of the people who set calculator policy for standardized tests. The College Board has an explicit whitelist and general guidelines here: https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/taking-the-test/calculator-policy https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/taking-the-tes... > You are not allowed to use any of the following items as a calculator: ... Models that can access the Internet, have wireless, Bluetooth, cellular, audio/video recording and playing, camera, or any other smart phone type feature
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- jetrink 6y ago
  > It's shitty behavior, for sure, but it's rational Can we just reflect on that though? The College Board states on their website that, "We value critical thinkers who assess the accuracy and relevancy of data and use it to support ideas and solve problems; who communicate clearly and concisely; and who make it a point to master the technologies relevant to their work." Their job is helping to identify which students possess the knowledge and reasoning skills to succeed in higher education. And yet, it is rational to assume that the College Board itself will not use critical thinking nor a mastery of calculator technology in this case. Instead, they will respond bureaucratically, banning a model of calculator, because a hobbyist hollowed one out and stuffed some electronics inside. When did the absurd become the rational?
  - daniel-thompson 6y ago
    To be clear, I was saying Casio's behavior is rational, not the College Board's.
tomxor 6y ago
> I am writing on behalf of CASIO [...] The code the repository contains is proprietary and not to be publicly published. The hosted content is a direct, literal copy of our client’s work. I hereby summon you to take expeditious action: to remove or to disable access to the infringing content immediately, but in any case no later than ten days as of today. The code is not even for the calculator, it's for a "esp8266-12E" which is an arduino-like board. This has more to do with the plastic case than electronics or code: If you watch the video of the modification to the calculator at the bottom of the article you can see the only thing the calculator board appears to share is a power source - this is essentially a duct tape mod that went to the effort of fitting a separate computer and display inside of the case. If you can find a fork (git links in the comments) you will also notice that it's all arduino code. Casio simply dislikes the mod because it adds a separate computer to their exam-approved calculator case, turning it into something only suited to formative assessment while being difficult to differentiate from the original. However the repo has pretty much nothing to do with their calculator other than the fact that it was once used on an arduino board that was glued inside of a casio calculator in a youtube video - IANAL but pretty sure DMCA has no ground - their statement certainly seems to be a lie based on the fact that the code is not for the Casio, then again they probably also have no legal grounds against people using their own plastic casio calculator cases for something that's not a casio circuit... so this is quite possibly a willful abuse of DMCA processes on Github to get it illegally removed. [EDIT] On closer inspection it should be possible to invalidate the complaint on the spot... the full complaint is included in the article, including a link to the supposed "original copyrighted work": https://support.casio.com/en/support/download.php?cid=004&pid=729 https://support.casio.com/en/support/download.php?cid=004&pi... It contains some generic example formulas in a simple looking expression language which I expect runs on their calculators. Not exactly something you could set up a http connection with, and definitely not a "literal copy" of the arduino code in the other repo.
- will_raw 6y ago
  "... to their exam-apporved calculator case" is a very good point, this calculator is basically used by every engineering student in their exam. And it clear that they feared that their sales might get hurt.
jventura 6y ago
I,ve seen the video at the bottom and the guy uses at most the calculator plastic case to house a oled display and a ESP. How can Casio (or someone on their behalf) find any plausible argument to file any complaint at all? I guess if people had to pay at least one dollar to file a complaint like this, you’d have less. Also, why did github removed the repo before checking things out first?
- verall 6y ago
  > I guess if people had to pay at least one dollar to file a complaint like this, you’d have less. It certainly isn't free. But if a legal department is a forgone cost, they will love an excuse to demonstrate their value.
  - loeg 6y ago
    It's just an email to send a DMCA copyright claim. There's no pro-forma sacrifice of a pile of money to discourage frivolous claims.
- loeg 6y ago
  > Also, why did github removed the repo before checking things out first? This is how they absolve themselves of liability for user content under the DMCA.
  - jventura 6y ago
    Guilty until proven innocent...
    - Silhouette 6y ago
      That's what counter-notices are for. It's more like guilty until you say "No, I'm not".
    - matheusmoreira 6y ago
      More like "this rich corporation says you're guilty so we're gonna preemptively delete your stuff before they sue us for hosting you".
souterrain 6y ago
The following changes should be made to DMCA: 1. Forbid delegation of enforcement to third parties. If you’re the copyright holder, you or your actual attorney may be the only ones to file a complaint. The copyright holder is solely responsible for such DMCA complaints. 2. Complaints found to be invalid shall result in reimbursement by the copyright holder an amount equal to three times the costs incurred to defend the complaint, including time, legal fees, etc., to the aggrieved party. 3. Three strike rule: if a copyright holder commits a false complaint action three times for a particular work, that work’s copyright is immediately invalidated and shall revert to the public domain.
- dlgeek 6y ago
  4. If a DMCA counter-claim is made, rather than provide the contact information to the claimant, the hosting provider shall retain the information and provide it directly to a court only if a lawsuit is actually brought.
- ikeboy 6y ago
  1. There's no reason to prohibit agent relationships, as long as liability attaches to the rights owner. 2. Strict liability is a good idea, but the exact amount should be up to discretion of the court. Some cases are more egregious than others. 3. This needs to be a ratio. If thousands of complaints are valid, it should require more than 3 mistaken ones. And the penalty is too harsh. Instead, they should be required to actually sue to enforce their copyright, instead of filing complaints.
  - bargl 6y ago
    3. That's a great idea and something similar could be used on youtube videos and demonitization / takedowns.
  - ikeboy 6y ago
    I also think once these fixes are implemented, that the same should apply to trademark and patent infringement notices. Those also see widespread abuse, it's just not as prominent because the targets are small businesses.
JayOC84 6y ago
I think this is to keep the calculators in schools. Teachers may start freaking out if they think students could cheat using this hack.
- bfung 6y ago
  If a student could go through all the soldering and programming involved, they should automatically pass some freshman college engineering course. Casio missed out on a new market for tinkers...
bubblethink 6y ago
The easy solution to all these source-code DMCA problems seems to be self-host your git repo in a sensible country. Why don't projects do that to begin with ? Every week some github drama makes it to the front page. github is not the same as git. If enough people host it elsewhere, maybe somebody in the US will wake up. There isn't any other solution to it.
pbasista 6y ago
From what I was able to see on YouTube and read in the repository's clone, the author of the original repository did not use the calculator's electronics or software at all. They only slightly modified its hardware by removing the solar panel and then installed some completely independent electronics in there. Yet, REACT (also known as the Anti-Counterfeiting Network), which represents Casio, claims that: > The code the repository contains is proprietary and not to be publicly published. The hosted content is a direct, literal copy of our client’s work. I would be interested to know which of their products uses WiFi and connects to a Firebase database.
anotheryou 6y ago
Have they even watched the vid? He doesn't touch the computing part of the computer, he just fits a micro controller with screen, battery and wifi in the case and removes the solar panel and a bit of plastic for that. Sadly that makes the whole project a bit less exciting, but still :)
agumonkey 6y ago
Quite sad, company providing calc tools to learn .. most probably aiming at future tech heads.. bashes on guy who does tech.
miga 6y ago
It is concerning that big companies have such undue influence on industry and engineering of an individual who legally bought a product, and was not in any way stealing it.
supernova87a 6y ago
I don't know about you, but I observe that when a company's legal filings outweigh its product innovations, its management is sleepwalking on autopilot, being caretaken by lawyers, and is soon to be fed to the private equity wolves.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
skdd8 6y ago
What in the actual fuck! I laughed so hard at this video just to watch in disgust how the DCMA and it's lackey GH would take down a repo that has nothing to do with Casio other than the name perhaps. Where is the freedom to tinker? If I modify my Toyota Corolla to take a Ferrari engine would Ferrari or Toyota come to my house and take my car away? Fight for your right to repair: https://www.eff.org/issues/right-to-repair https://www.eff.org/issues/right-to-repair https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npd_xDuNi9k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npd_xDuNi9k
- userbinator 6y ago
  The right to repair (and mod) has been a part of contemporary car culture for around a century (at least in the US), and it's also why there is a huge aftermarket for it. If anything, I think Tesla is currently the only automaker who would disapprove.
MintelIE 6y ago
All the modern calculator companies are hostile to their user base. Their actual customers are the textbook companies, standardized test firms, and school districts, it seems. There is an exception, the SwissMicros people[1]. But that seems to be about it in this modern era. HP used to be excellent as their main market was engineers and scientists and other professionals. But the Prime is obviously made for the school calculator market. It seems that large companies have decided the school market is the only one which matters now, and compliance with standardized testing rules is more important than other considerations. That's probably why used HP calculators from the golden age cost as much or more than a new TI, Casio, or Prime. [1] https://www.swissmicros.com/ https://www.swissmicros.com/
teh_klev 6y ago
The twitter account @CasioMaths seems to the be last remaining active Casio calculator twitter account (appears to be UK based) I can find. I've already tweeted them to point out the error of their ways. Perhaps others could follow suit, but obviously in a polite and civilised manner, let's not have an abusive pile-on.
djmips 6y ago
His big mistake was using the words "Hack Casio" in the name of his project. heheh.
Aeolun 6y ago
Somewhere, someone in Casio is so done with life that they figured that this was a reasonable way to spend their time and company money...
- apricot 6y ago
  Pretty sure this was done at the behest of someone who was afraid that calculator could lose its exam certification, something which is a Big Deal for them.
garfieldnate 6y ago
One product I absolutely loved from Casio was their Japanese electronic dictionaries. At some point they replaced their black and wide LCD screens with backlit full-color LCD screens and the hardware became much slower. I've been looking for resources on reverse engineering or jailbreaking the late 2000's models, but haven't been able to find much.
29athrowaway 6y ago
I think in this case, the calculator circuitry remains the same. The only thing modified was the case.
rasz 6y ago
Wasnt aware Casio was running their calculators using ESP8266. That would be the only plausible reason for copyright claim ...
metaphor 6y ago
WT actual F?? From GitHub's policy on submitting a DMCA takedown notice[1] on what the complaint must contain: > (7) Include the following statement: "I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above on the infringing web pages is not authorized by the copyright owner, or its agent, or the law. I have taken fair use into consideration." > (8) Also include the following statement: "I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in this notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner, or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed." The claimed "original content" (preloaded programs for a fx-FD10 Pro) cited in the takedown notice[2] isn't even remotely relevant to the physical host that the hack targets (a fx-991MS). After watching the 11 min video and without even looking at the repo contents, it's so obvious that REACT couldn't possibly have submitted this DMCA takedown notice "in good faith" given the standalone hack has absolutely nothing to do with the target host's firmware/software--or anything published on Casio's website--to begin with! So "under penalty of perjury", React is exploiting how GitHub passively handles these DMCA takedown notices...I mean seriously, an irrelevant download link that clearly wasn't reviewed by anything that constitutes human intelligence can nerf an entire repo?? Unfortunately, this has been the meta for as long as I can remember and this pragmatically non-existent qualifying bar is just 1 reason why I don't play on GitHub. But the part I find to be the most egregious that it appears no one is really talking about? To defend himself, this guy has to satisfy GitHub's counter notice policy[3], in particular: > (3) Provide your contact information. Include your email address, name, telephone number, and physical address. The policy doesn't even require explaining to GitHub why the takedown is bullshit; it's just to signal the other side that you're willing to defend the thing under scrutiny against further legal action. The guy already pulled the counter notice trigger, but without dedicated legal representation and/or the public media on your side, it's difficult for any 1 dood in the capacity of private citizen to expose personal identifiable information and embrace the threat of a legal harassment campaign by an organization of legal professionals. React knows they don't have anything, but if the victim doesn't have balls + legal counsel + disposable income, the gambit is that they really won't need anything either. [1] https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-dmca-takedown-notice#your-complaint-must- https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submi... [2] https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-20-Casio.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-2... [3] https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-dmca-counter-notice#your-counter-notice-must https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submi...
goatinaboat 6y ago
freedom-to-tinker’ proponents throwing their hands up in despair wondering why big corporations have nothing better to do. This is not about Casio really, this is about React who need to justify their existence to their sponsors. Casio probably wasn’t even aware this was happening at first.

452 points by fraqed 6y ago

nomadluap 6y ago

Does anyone have a clone of the original repository?

bhickey 6y ago
Here's a fork https://github.com/rida1148/Hack-Casio-Calculator https://github.com/rida1148/Hack-Casio-Calculator
- _sbrk 6y ago
  Don't you just love the Streissand effect? :-)
- ngcc_hk 6y ago
  Original is back
tzs 6y ago
Just wait a few days and it will be back up. DMCA works like this: 1. Copyright owner sends a notice to hosting provider alleging infringement and asking for the content to be removed. 2. Hosting provider checks to make sure the notice has all the legally required items, and if so takes the content down and notifies the person who uploaded the content. 3. If the uploader feels the allegation is false, they send a notice back to the hosting provider stating this. 4. Hosting provider checks to make sure that notice also has all the legally required items. If it does, they hosting provider is required to put the content back up within a few days. 5. Hosting provider given the complainant the uploader's contact information. At that point the hosting provider is free of liability, even if the material is infringing. If the complainant wants it down, they have to sue the uploader directly. In this case, we are somewhere in step 4. It seems very unlikely that CASIO will actually sue, so once step 4 is complete that should be the end of this. You've probably seen many cases where DMCA did not work like this. What's generally happening there is that the hosting provider has implemented their own system for dealing with this things instead of following the DMCA procedure (hello, Google!). People tend to call any take down request a DMCA request regardless of whether or not the hosting provider actually uses the DMCA procedure.

robotmay 6y ago

This isn't the only bad PR tactic I've seen from Casio lately. There's a piano reviewer on YouTube who noticed a flaw in the action of a new digital piano they make, and their responses varied from claiming he was lying to _reportedly_ spamming his videos with negative comments. Here's the 3 relevant videos where he first raises the issue, responds to Casio, then just straight up dismantles the piano and proves it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7xHgXFEJUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7xHgXFEJUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAfScFK0QU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAfScFK0QU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqNK3w-2C6I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqNK3w-2C6I

cosmojg 6y ago
Whelp, Casio has officially made its way onto my list of brands to never buy.
- squarefoot 6y ago
  You beat me to it. Using our wallet is the only type of reply businesses understand.
  - Klinky 6y ago
    That's like expecting a butterfly's wing flaps to stop a hurricane half-way across the world. A lot of businesses are actually incompetent at understanding the reasons consumers haven't bought their product. Naming and shaming on social media is more effective, but likely they'll just rebuff the claims and dump more money into marketing, as marketing is often very effective at covering up a shoddy product. Voting with your wallet is the weakest position. Make a lot of noise as to why you're voting with your wallet, so they get the message. However, in a lot of cases, they won't care, and your action is just a droplet in an ocean, inconsequential.
    - madacoo 6y ago
      So you're saying vote with your wallet but also publicise the fact you are so doing on social media? Isn't that exactly what the user you replied to did? How else could you have replied to them?

dukoid 6y ago

What are the penalties for wrong DMCA complaints?

ikeboy 6y ago
It's very difficult to establish the bad faith required to win a 512(f) misrepresentation case, but it's doable and you can win damages.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
  In the UK you could sue for libel, because this suit potentially defames the public character of the accused and could cause both personal and professional losses. It would put the burden of proof on Casio, requiring convincing proof that the claims in the lawsuit are true and neither vexatious nor frivolous. That would be interesting to watch, because I get the impression Casio's legal team have no idea what they're doing. They're really trying to protect Casio's status in exams, but to do that they're talking about source code and using the DMCA as a legal gambit. I doubt they're really interested in whether source code was used or even what source code is. Someone on the team thought "OK - sounds good - we can make that stick" and here we are. If it's really not true - which sounds likely, from the comments - it's sloppy and lazy work and leaves any number of open goals for countersuits.
  - ikeboy 6y ago
    In the US you only can't sue for libel because DMCA preempts all federal and state causes of action - instead you sue for misrepresentation under 512(f). But for false claims of infringement that don't involve copyright, a libel claim can work. I've previously mentioned my own 8 figure lawsuit against tp-link for false claims of counterfeiting; I have antitrust, tortious interference, declaratory judgement, and defamation (i.e. libel) causes of action. I know of at least one similar case with a multi-million dollar jury award from 1999 (see Alexander binzel v nu-tecsys.)
cmiles74 6y ago
Not much, the person accused would need to sue. https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/what_are_penalties_false_copyright_infringement_claims https://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/what_a...

dylan604 6y ago

"This week REACT wrote to Github, "<snip> "CASIO may somehow feel it’s in the right here but it does seem just a little bit petty." More likely REACT reacted on their own as that's what their entire existence is about. This was probably yet again some lawyer working for the group that has no knowledge of coding, see's the trade name of a company they are representing, and took action. Of course, I'm just playing armchair QB and have no knowledge whatsoever either way. He said, EvilCorp said, He loses.

foobar_ 6y ago

Intellectual property is anti-competitive and monopolistic which is anti capitalistic. It started out as a reward system for authors and inventors. What we now have is an obscenity becauase we are rewarding corporations that neither produce nor invent anything. The legal loophole that a corporation is a person is false. Adam Smith did not have that in mind when he was extolling the virtues of capitalism. We need to force liability based capitalism without personhood and breakup all conglomerates.

kube-system 6y ago
People who have rights individually should still have those rights when they assemble. The practical consequences of removing personhood would be disastrous for the rights of individuals who work at a corporation and the rights of individuals who want to contract with a corporation. If you think it’s hard to sue a bad corporation now, just think about how hard it would be if you had to individually name each of the owners in a suit.
- foobar_ 6y ago
  Find an email thread that links them ? For people thinking you need limited liability to be a big company ... you don't. Bloomberg is not an LLP as far as I know.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    Don’t think that thread exists for any public companies, most email servers can’t handle that many recipients. Bloomberg is an LP which must have at least one partner with limited liability.

elliekelly 6y ago

> Neutrino informs us that he has already filed a DMCA counternotice with Github to get his project back. I’m increasingly uncomfortable with the balance of knowledge/power/experience in the counter-notice process. The repo owner is at a huge disadvantage when going up against the experienced and expensive lawyers filing these claims. Even when the law is on the developer’s side it’s almost an unwinnable battle.

ikeboy 6y ago
In this case, Casio is unlikely to file a frivolous lawsuit, so the content will go back up. The only disadvantage is if the rights owner is willing to file a frivolous lawsuit, and in that scenario their lawyers can get sanctioned by the court. Look at e.g. Richard Leibowitz for an aggressive copyright attorney who's been sanctioned by various courts.
- elliekelly 6y ago
  I don’t know much about the intricacies of the DMCA process but my understanding is that the counter-notice will put the content back up unless the original filer (in this case, Casio) provides proof they’ve filed suit. Is there anything stopping Casio from sending a strongly worded letter of their intent to file suit if the content isn’t removed? Is there anything stopping Casio from bringing suit, submitting the docket number to Github to have the content removed, and then withdrawing after 30 (or 60 or 90) days? Somewhat related, are there any transparency sites that track DMCA notices for which a counter-notice was filed and no suit was ever brought? To give the public an idea of which companies are most aggressively using takedown notices even where they might not feel they have much of a case.
  - ikeboy 6y ago
    1. It's unethical to threaten to sue without an actual intention of suing - lawyers can be disciplined for that. 2. Once you sue, you can't dismiss unilaterally once the other side has responded. They can reasonably say "we put money into fighting this - you can't withdraw unless you do it with prejudice, which means you can't bring the same suit again." If there's a dismissal of any kind, that could be submitted to GitHub and they'd be permitted to reinstate the content, unless the court specifically said otherwise. The statute doesn't explicitly say this, but it talks about a lawsuit being filed to restrain infringement - it's obvious that if such a lawsuit is dismissed then that provision is no longer satisfied. I'm satisfied any judge looking at this would agree with my interpretation.

daniel-thompson 6y ago

It's shitty behavior, for sure, but it's rational given what I assume to be their incentive: to stay in the good graces of the people who set calculator policy for standardized tests. The College Board has an explicit whitelist and general guidelines here: https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/taking-the-test/calculator-policy https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/taking-the-tes... > You are not allowed to use any of the following items as a calculator: ... Models that can access the Internet, have wireless, Bluetooth, cellular, audio/video recording and playing, camera, or any other smart phone type feature

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jetrink 6y ago
> It's shitty behavior, for sure, but it's rational Can we just reflect on that though? The College Board states on their website that, "We value critical thinkers who assess the accuracy and relevancy of data and use it to support ideas and solve problems; who communicate clearly and concisely; and who make it a point to master the technologies relevant to their work." Their job is helping to identify which students possess the knowledge and reasoning skills to succeed in higher education. And yet, it is rational to assume that the College Board itself will not use critical thinking nor a mastery of calculator technology in this case. Instead, they will respond bureaucratically, banning a model of calculator, because a hobbyist hollowed one out and stuffed some electronics inside. When did the absurd become the rational?
- daniel-thompson 6y ago
  To be clear, I was saying Casio's behavior is rational, not the College Board's.

tomxor 6y ago

> I am writing on behalf of CASIO [...] The code the repository contains is proprietary and not to be publicly published. The hosted content is a direct, literal copy of our client’s work. I hereby summon you to take expeditious action: to remove or to disable access to the infringing content immediately, but in any case no later than ten days as of today. The code is not even for the calculator, it's for a "esp8266-12E" which is an arduino-like board. This has more to do with the plastic case than electronics or code: If you watch the video of the modification to the calculator at the bottom of the article you can see the only thing the calculator board appears to share is a power source - this is essentially a duct tape mod that went to the effort of fitting a separate computer and display inside of the case. If you can find a fork (git links in the comments) you will also notice that it's all arduino code. Casio simply dislikes the mod because it adds a separate computer to their exam-approved calculator case, turning it into something only suited to formative assessment while being difficult to differentiate from the original. However the repo has pretty much nothing to do with their calculator other than the fact that it was once used on an arduino board that was glued inside of a casio calculator in a youtube video - IANAL but pretty sure DMCA has no ground - their statement certainly seems to be a lie based on the fact that the code is not for the Casio, then again they probably also have no legal grounds against people using their own plastic casio calculator cases for something that's not a casio circuit... so this is quite possibly a willful abuse of DMCA processes on Github to get it illegally removed. [EDIT] On closer inspection it should be possible to invalidate the complaint on the spot... the full complaint is included in the article, including a link to the supposed "original copyrighted work": https://support.casio.com/en/support/download.php?cid=004&pid=729 https://support.casio.com/en/support/download.php?cid=004&pi... It contains some generic example formulas in a simple looking expression language which I expect runs on their calculators. Not exactly something you could set up a http connection with, and definitely not a "literal copy" of the arduino code in the other repo.

will_raw 6y ago
"... to their exam-apporved calculator case" is a very good point, this calculator is basically used by every engineering student in their exam. And it clear that they feared that their sales might get hurt.

jventura 6y ago

I,ve seen the video at the bottom and the guy uses at most the calculator plastic case to house a oled display and a ESP. How can Casio (or someone on their behalf) find any plausible argument to file any complaint at all? I guess if people had to pay at least one dollar to file a complaint like this, you’d have less. Also, why did github removed the repo before checking things out first?

verall 6y ago
> I guess if people had to pay at least one dollar to file a complaint like this, you’d have less. It certainly isn't free. But if a legal department is a forgone cost, they will love an excuse to demonstrate their value.
- loeg 6y ago
  It's just an email to send a DMCA copyright claim. There's no pro-forma sacrifice of a pile of money to discourage frivolous claims.
loeg 6y ago
> Also, why did github removed the repo before checking things out first? This is how they absolve themselves of liability for user content under the DMCA.
- jventura 6y ago
  Guilty until proven innocent...
  - Silhouette 6y ago
    That's what counter-notices are for. It's more like guilty until you say "No, I'm not".
  - matheusmoreira 6y ago
    More like "this rich corporation says you're guilty so we're gonna preemptively delete your stuff before they sue us for hosting you".

souterrain 6y ago

The following changes should be made to DMCA: 1. Forbid delegation of enforcement to third parties. If you’re the copyright holder, you or your actual attorney may be the only ones to file a complaint. The copyright holder is solely responsible for such DMCA complaints. 2. Complaints found to be invalid shall result in reimbursement by the copyright holder an amount equal to three times the costs incurred to defend the complaint, including time, legal fees, etc., to the aggrieved party. 3. Three strike rule: if a copyright holder commits a false complaint action three times for a particular work, that work’s copyright is immediately invalidated and shall revert to the public domain.

dlgeek 6y ago
4. If a DMCA counter-claim is made, rather than provide the contact information to the claimant, the hosting provider shall retain the information and provide it directly to a court only if a lawsuit is actually brought.
ikeboy 6y ago
1. There's no reason to prohibit agent relationships, as long as liability attaches to the rights owner. 2. Strict liability is a good idea, but the exact amount should be up to discretion of the court. Some cases are more egregious than others. 3. This needs to be a ratio. If thousands of complaints are valid, it should require more than 3 mistaken ones. And the penalty is too harsh. Instead, they should be required to actually sue to enforce their copyright, instead of filing complaints.
- bargl 6y ago
  3. That's a great idea and something similar could be used on youtube videos and demonitization / takedowns.
- ikeboy 6y ago
  I also think once these fixes are implemented, that the same should apply to trademark and patent infringement notices. Those also see widespread abuse, it's just not as prominent because the targets are small businesses.

JayOC84 6y ago

I think this is to keep the calculators in schools. Teachers may start freaking out if they think students could cheat using this hack.

bfung 6y ago
If a student could go through all the soldering and programming involved, they should automatically pass some freshman college engineering course. Casio missed out on a new market for tinkers...

bubblethink 6y ago

The easy solution to all these source-code DMCA problems seems to be self-host your git repo in a sensible country. Why don't projects do that to begin with ? Every week some github drama makes it to the front page. github is not the same as git. If enough people host it elsewhere, maybe somebody in the US will wake up. There isn't any other solution to it.

pbasista 6y ago

From what I was able to see on YouTube and read in the repository's clone, the author of the original repository did not use the calculator's electronics or software at all. They only slightly modified its hardware by removing the solar panel and then installed some completely independent electronics in there. Yet, REACT (also known as the Anti-Counterfeiting Network), which represents Casio, claims that: > The code the repository contains is proprietary and not to be publicly published. The hosted content is a direct, literal copy of our client’s work. I would be interested to know which of their products uses WiFi and connects to a Firebase database.

anotheryou 6y ago

Have they even watched the vid? He doesn't touch the computing part of the computer, he just fits a micro controller with screen, battery and wifi in the case and removes the solar panel and a bit of plastic for that. Sadly that makes the whole project a bit less exciting, but still :)

agumonkey 6y ago

Quite sad, company providing calc tools to learn .. most probably aiming at future tech heads.. bashes on guy who does tech.

miga 6y ago

It is concerning that big companies have such undue influence on industry and engineering of an individual who legally bought a product, and was not in any way stealing it.

supernova87a 6y ago

I don't know about you, but I observe that when a company's legal filings outweigh its product innovations, its management is sleepwalking on autopilot, being caretaken by lawyers, and is soon to be fed to the private equity wolves.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

skdd8 6y ago

What in the actual fuck! I laughed so hard at this video just to watch in disgust how the DCMA and it's lackey GH would take down a repo that has nothing to do with Casio other than the name perhaps. Where is the freedom to tinker? If I modify my Toyota Corolla to take a Ferrari engine would Ferrari or Toyota come to my house and take my car away? Fight for your right to repair: https://www.eff.org/issues/right-to-repair https://www.eff.org/issues/right-to-repair https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npd_xDuNi9k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npd_xDuNi9k

userbinator 6y ago
The right to repair (and mod) has been a part of contemporary car culture for around a century (at least in the US), and it's also why there is a huge aftermarket for it. If anything, I think Tesla is currently the only automaker who would disapprove.

MintelIE 6y ago

All the modern calculator companies are hostile to their user base. Their actual customers are the textbook companies, standardized test firms, and school districts, it seems. There is an exception, the SwissMicros people[1]. But that seems to be about it in this modern era. HP used to be excellent as their main market was engineers and scientists and other professionals. But the Prime is obviously made for the school calculator market. It seems that large companies have decided the school market is the only one which matters now, and compliance with standardized testing rules is more important than other considerations. That's probably why used HP calculators from the golden age cost as much or more than a new TI, Casio, or Prime. [1] https://www.swissmicros.com/ https://www.swissmicros.com/

teh_klev 6y ago

The twitter account @CasioMaths seems to the be last remaining active Casio calculator twitter account (appears to be UK based) I can find. I've already tweeted them to point out the error of their ways. Perhaps others could follow suit, but obviously in a polite and civilised manner, let's not have an abusive pile-on.

djmips 6y ago

His big mistake was using the words "Hack Casio" in the name of his project. heheh.

Aeolun 6y ago

Somewhere, someone in Casio is so done with life that they figured that this was a reasonable way to spend their time and company money...

apricot 6y ago
Pretty sure this was done at the behest of someone who was afraid that calculator could lose its exam certification, something which is a Big Deal for them.

garfieldnate 6y ago

One product I absolutely loved from Casio was their Japanese electronic dictionaries. At some point they replaced their black and wide LCD screens with backlit full-color LCD screens and the hardware became much slower. I've been looking for resources on reverse engineering or jailbreaking the late 2000's models, but haven't been able to find much.

29athrowaway 6y ago

I think in this case, the calculator circuitry remains the same. The only thing modified was the case.

rasz 6y ago

Wasnt aware Casio was running their calculators using ESP8266. That would be the only plausible reason for copyright claim ...

metaphor 6y ago

WT actual F?? From GitHub's policy on submitting a DMCA takedown notice[1] on what the complaint must contain: > (7) Include the following statement: "I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above on the infringing web pages is not authorized by the copyright owner, or its agent, or the law. I have taken fair use into consideration." > (8) Also include the following statement: "I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in this notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner, or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed." The claimed "original content" (preloaded programs for a fx-FD10 Pro) cited in the takedown notice[2] isn't even remotely relevant to the physical host that the hack targets (a fx-991MS). After watching the 11 min video and without even looking at the repo contents, it's so obvious that REACT couldn't possibly have submitted this DMCA takedown notice "in good faith" given the standalone hack has absolutely nothing to do with the target host's firmware/software--or anything published on Casio's website--to begin with! So "under penalty of perjury", React is exploiting how GitHub passively handles these DMCA takedown notices...I mean seriously, an irrelevant download link that clearly wasn't reviewed by anything that constitutes human intelligence can nerf an entire repo?? Unfortunately, this has been the meta for as long as I can remember and this pragmatically non-existent qualifying bar is just 1 reason why I don't play on GitHub. But the part I find to be the most egregious that it appears no one is really talking about? To defend himself, this guy has to satisfy GitHub's counter notice policy[3], in particular: > (3) Provide your contact information. Include your email address, name, telephone number, and physical address. The policy doesn't even require explaining to GitHub why the takedown is bullshit; it's just to signal the other side that you're willing to defend the thing under scrutiny against further legal action. The guy already pulled the counter notice trigger, but without dedicated legal representation and/or the public media on your side, it's difficult for any 1 dood in the capacity of private citizen to expose personal identifiable information and embrace the threat of a legal harassment campaign by an organization of legal professionals. React knows they don't have anything, but if the victim doesn't have balls + legal counsel + disposable income, the gambit is that they really won't need anything either. [1] https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-dmca-takedown-notice#your-complaint-must- https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submi... [2] https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-20-Casio.md https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-2... [3] https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-dmca-counter-notice#your-counter-notice-must https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submi...

goatinaboat 6y ago

freedom-to-tinker’ proponents throwing their hands up in despair wondering why big corporations have nothing better to do. This is not about Casio really, this is about React who need to justify their existence to their sponsors. Casio probably wasn’t even aware this was happening at first.