Ford "runs into" independent developers of diagnostic tools
If you buy a car or other device, then you logically assume that you get it entirely in your property, you have the right to modify the car to your taste, to understand the mechanisms of its operation. However, Ford Motor thinks otherwise.
The Michigan corporation filed a lawsuit against Autel, a third-party manufacturer of automotive diagnostic tools. She is accused of releasing a diagnostic device that contains a list of Ford parts and specifications (FFData file). The auto company declares that it owns the copyright for this list, so competitors cannot include it in their diagnostic tools.
In addition, Autel is accused of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) after writing a program that circumvents proprietary "encryption and obfuscation technology." Its Ford uses to protect access to FFData.
')
Autel Intelligent Technology Co. - Chinese corporation, it has an American branch of Autel US Inc.
Scanner Autel Maxidiag Elite MD703 OBD2
Lawyers of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) consider Ford’s chances of winning this matter to be dubious . Simple facts and data can not be protected by copyright, but sometimes you can protect the copyright compilation (compilation), if they are creative enough. “It doesn't look like Ford opened a new page of creativity when it decided which parts to include in the catalog and in what order,” writes EFF.
However, the Ford has a trump card up its sleeve. It follows from the claim that she included some non-existent parts in the FFData list, inventing their names. But it is unlikely that such “creativity” will be enough to win in court.
The case of Feist v. Can be used as a precedent . Rural , which reached the Supreme Court of the United States and where certain boundaries were established for what is considered creative. Then the court recognized that copyright does not apply to the telephone directory (names, cities and telephone numbers of all subscribers of the company in alphabetical order).
If the court recognizes that the FFData file does not contain anything protected by copyright, then there is also a chance to escape from responsibility under the DMCA law, according to lawyers of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They say that circumventing the protection of information that is subject to free distribution is not a violation of the DMCA in the interpretation of most courts.
One way or another, this case is another example of how copyright and related rights legislation is used to put pressure on competitors. In addition, we are dealing with such a combination of DMCA and copyright standards, which makes it impossible to access information in principle. Indeed, in this situation we cannot try to circumvent the protection - who knows, if the protected information falls under the copyright, then we become criminals after the fact.
The Michigan corporation filed a lawsuit against Autel, a third-party manufacturer of automotive diagnostic tools. She is accused of releasing a diagnostic device that contains a list of Ford parts and specifications (FFData file). The auto company declares that it owns the copyright for this list, so competitors cannot include it in their diagnostic tools.
In addition, Autel is accused of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) after writing a program that circumvents proprietary "encryption and obfuscation technology." Its Ford uses to protect access to FFData.
')
Autel Intelligent Technology Co. - Chinese corporation, it has an American branch of Autel US Inc.
Scanner Autel Maxidiag Elite MD703 OBD2
Lawyers of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) consider Ford’s chances of winning this matter to be dubious . Simple facts and data can not be protected by copyright, but sometimes you can protect the copyright compilation (compilation), if they are creative enough. “It doesn't look like Ford opened a new page of creativity when it decided which parts to include in the catalog and in what order,” writes EFF.
However, the Ford has a trump card up its sleeve. It follows from the claim that she included some non-existent parts in the FFData list, inventing their names. But it is unlikely that such “creativity” will be enough to win in court.
The case of Feist v. Can be used as a precedent . Rural , which reached the Supreme Court of the United States and where certain boundaries were established for what is considered creative. Then the court recognized that copyright does not apply to the telephone directory (names, cities and telephone numbers of all subscribers of the company in alphabetical order).
If the court recognizes that the FFData file does not contain anything protected by copyright, then there is also a chance to escape from responsibility under the DMCA law, according to lawyers of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. They say that circumventing the protection of information that is subject to free distribution is not a violation of the DMCA in the interpretation of most courts.
One way or another, this case is another example of how copyright and related rights legislation is used to put pressure on competitors. In addition, we are dealing with such a combination of DMCA and copyright standards, which makes it impossible to access information in principle. Indeed, in this situation we cannot try to circumvent the protection - who knows, if the protected information falls under the copyright, then we become criminals after the fact.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/375349/
All Articles