4 ms·
It is like Sega v. Accolade, in the sense that it’s clear abuse of IP law to limit competition. But there are two major differences: Although there were accusat
by anjbe 12y ago
It is like Sega v. Accolade, in the sense that it’s clear abuse of IP law to limit competition. But there are two major differences: Although there were accusations of unauthorized copying in Sega v. Accolade, the major issue was that Sega forced the console to display their trademark upon successfully loading a game, and then claimed that Accolade was committing trademark infringement by making a game that could successfully boot. Additionally, the DMCA didn’t exist back then, so violating copy protection wasn’t actually against the law on its own.
There have actually been several copyright cases with good results (Sega v. Accolade, Galoob v. Nintendo, Sony v. Bleem, Sony v. Connectix, Lexmark v. Static Control), but so many cases that have ended in a negative result (Blizzard v. Jung, Universal v. Reimerdes, Macrovision v. Sima) did so largely due to the DMCA. This is why, although I hope Ford loses this case, I hope even more for active effort to fix the DMCA through Congress, not the judiciary.
- _nullandnull_ 12y agoThank you for the response. I have not heard of some of those cases. I'm looking forward to reading up on those.