Questions About Backup Managers & DMCA

[dlcrook-PSG]

I've got a few questions about BM's and their relevancy to DMCA notices in the US. I'm not a software engineer or coder by any means so:


* Are apps like Multiman_v1.13.0+/Gaia_v2.0+ compiled using Sony's SDK or PSLight?

* Do these apps actually contain the code to circumvent DRM or does CFW like Kmeaw do that?

* Is any of Sony's code used in any of these managers code?

* Where would the DMCA fall against these types of applications.


Thanks in advance to any real, relevant answers to this quest. It is very much appreciated!

[blazie151]

*I believe that MultiMan has not completely converted to the PSLight SDK, and that's the reason Deanrr has decided not to share his source code; this is mainly just a speculation and a hunch though. Gaia is open source. Drizzt has shared his code, and the application is developed entirely with the PSLight SDK.

*The code used to circumvent the DRM is 2-fold. Peek/poke is enabled with cfw. That [peek/poke] enables new functions (payloads, syscall36, etc) to be patched into memory. The actually patching of those functions is done by the lvl2 pkg. The source of that package was released, and incorporated into the boot sequence of the BMs (backup managers). Because it's now contained inside the BM, the BM is actually circumventing the DRM. This is actually unneeded, and causes potential legal problems, which I have voiced before. If the end user is responsible for flashing to cfw w/ peek/poke, then running the lvl2 patch on their own, the BM would not be circumventing the DRM. This is actually how it was done when kmeaw's cfw and the lvl2 patch first came out. The patches were then incorporated into the BMs for end user convenience, which I believe was a huge mistake. It now allows apps like multiman and gaia to be subjected to $onys legal wrath.

*ASAIK, none of $ony's code is used in the backup managers. MultiMan might be an exception because the source code isn't released, but I doubt it.

*The DMCA could land very heavily on these backup managers now that the DRM circumvention processes are contained within the applications themselves. Before, (I'm using MultiMan as an example), the application could be used primarily for its ftp, file manager, and avchd functions, without using it to load backups if you were not a pirate. It could only be used as a way to play backup games if the end user went through the extra steps of installing and running another dev's code before running the BM (whether through a dongle jailbreak or a cfw with peek/poke, and running the lvl2 patch). Now that that has changed, and the BM itself is circumventing the DRM, I'm waiting to see all the BMs start getting sued.

[ch13696]

Well, at first I didn't think much about the issues because I would assume the backup manager for the Wii would have the same problem. I haven't seen anything happen to the team that made that. However, everything that @blazie151 says does make sense.

Besides, In a way I think that the BM's would have to be an issue with the developers and publishers. That's why Sony isn't making a separate lawsuit for the BM teams. Not only that, if it is such a huge issue, then why don't we see publishers sue the people that make the cracks for PC games?

I don't know. I'm running a lot of ideas into my head as to why I don't see Sony going after the people that make BM's.

[fivee]

I think its all about location.

See, im my country the right to backup you'r legally obtained software/music/videos comes first. DRM circunvention is a need for you be able to have backups (whats the point in having backups if you cant use them?)
The same for some other countrys.

Remember the DeCSS? The author was aquited from all chages, decrypting the dvd was a necessary step for him to backup his dvd's, public release of the program served other persons in the same need. Sure, it opens the door's to piracing, but there is a perfectly legitimate need of that program.

The US however does not have a linear legislation like most coutrys, its based on "legal precedents", and the supreme court is above any other legal thing. including laws. so yes, in the states there is a milde possibility of sony winning something, anywhere else? I doubt it, they certanly will not go agains waninkoko since spain has similar legeslation to my own country (i think, thoug i might be wrong).

[blazie151]

And even in the US, California is one of the few if only places where the EULA holds any ground. In New York the case would've been tossed out of court already. That's why $ony pushed so hard to have jurisdiction in California.

The problem with this whole lawsuit is the long term effect it could have on other companies EULAs. If a company can criminally prosecute a person for using hardware they purchased in a way that wasn't intended, then all hell could break loose. Imagine buying a computer and then going to jail because you installed linux on your $ony Viao. Or you Dell XPS for that matter. The simple fact that the case has been going on this long is scary.