Head Tracking with Cliffs of Dover

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

Disclaimer
The material is intended to provide my view of the current state of the law protecting digital information. It is not being offered as legal advice, and if you have a specific legal question, you should contact an attorney qualified by both experience and bar membership to provide legal advice.

http://digital-law-online.info/notice.htm






no where does it say, you can use what you have identified and achieving interoperability would apply to the sim/ game, or to the TIR hardware itself, provided there are no no infringements

Obviously, there's no point in discussing anymore if you are just going to make stuff up. Have fun spamming away the truth in your quest for the moral highground.

[MadBlaster]

Before I leave, remember 20 or so pages back you seemed to know that copy rights applies to software, not hardware. So it is obvious to me you are now being disengenious putting hardware in the arguement to spam the truth away. People can read the Sega case for themselves. It dealt with the reverse engineering of sega's software by a commercial enterprise. Spin it all you want. You can't change history or the law.

[robtek]

MadBlaster,

quoting legal text and decisions of courts here prove absolutely NOTHING!!
The same procedure with different attorneys might, and will, lead to a different outcome.

[Sauf]

Originally Posted by robtek

MadBlaster,

quoting legal text and decisions of courts here prove absolutely NOTHING!!
The same procedure with different attorneys might, and will, lead to a different outcome.

Well if lawyers and attorneys cant agree, HONESTLY what friggin hope do you think you blokes have???? page 66 ffs.

I personally hope it has both. But lets wait and see, going against each other in roundabout arguments is just losing support for both views imo.

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

Before I leave, remember 20 or so pages back you seemed to know that copy rights applies to software, not hardware. So it is obvious to me you are now being disengenious putting hardware in the arguement to spam the truth away. People can read the Sega case for themselves. It dealt with the reverse engineering of sega's software by a commercial enterprise. Spin it all you want. You can't change history or the law.

Sega was a console manufacturer much the same as X-Box, Wii, etc

[sigur_ros]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

no where does it say, you can use what you have identified and achieving interoperability would apply to the sim/ game itself...

That DMCA exception design to allow program-program communication, using what you have identified from reverse engineer already allowed under copyright, repeated here for third time.

US Copyright Law Section 102

'In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.'

TRIPS version for NWO

'Article 9
Relation to the Berne Convention
2. Copyright protection shall extend to expressions and not to ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such.'

Also

'Federal regulators lifted a cloud of uncertainty when they announced it was lawful to hack or “jailbreak” an iPhone, declaring Monday there was “no basis for copyright law to assist Apple in protecting its restrictive business model.”'

[Wolf_Rider]

Article 10
Computer Programs and Compilations of Data

1. Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971).

2. Compilations of data or other material, whether in machine readable or other form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such. Such protection, which shall not extend to the data or material itself, shall be without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material itself.

and "jailbreaking", which your article link refers to is in relation to cirmcumventing protections on mobile smart phones and not the iPad. So, in this sense, you would have to go the developer... but wait, you don't have to as methods already exist which can be hooked into

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by robtek

MadBlaster,
quoting legal text and decisions of courts here prove absolutely NOTHING!!

Tell that to Sega.

Originally Posted by robtek

The same procedure with different attorneys might, and will, lead to a different outcome.

It's been near 20 years since that decision. The DMCA provision that stems from that went into effect maybe 6 years later. You have a big hurdle to overcome.

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

Sega was a console manufacturer much the same as X-Box, Wii, etc

no kidding.

[Wolf_Rider]

yes Blaster, Sega and Apple iPhone cases were similar and Apple should have known better... even Android incorporates a switch to allow untested(unapproved) 3rd party apps to be installed or not, *and at least with "approved" apps, the consumer knows the app has been tested and won't cause system instability, will get support and won't trash their warranty.

but this is the other end of the stick to getting alternative headtracking inclusion in games but (additional to my previous) may be constructive to seeking HT inclusion into DirectX. Then again, what with Kinect for PC, MS may already be onto that.


* late edit