17 ms·

IANAL, but the two things seem related, why is GP being down voted? From just a reading of the wiki pages without much law knowledge it does seem like sega wou

• monocasa 8y ago
  I don't think they would assuming that they wrote their own game and were only using of Sony's what was necessary to run their own code. See Chamberlain v. Skylink for a post DMCA case on the matter. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._Skylink_Technologies,_Inc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._S....
  • tzs 8y ago
    HN's algorithm to turn a URL into a clickable link can have trouble with links that end in punctuation, and your link fell victim. Here's an attempt to make it work: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._Skylink_Technologies,_Inc. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._S...? That's a mobile link since yours was mobile. Here's the non-mobile version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._Skylink_Technologies,_Inc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_Group,_Inc._v._Sky...?
  • Pharaoh2 8y ago
    That seems to deal with anti-circumvention provisions and not copyright provision and not with infringing on trademark/copyright as the GGGGP (white-flame) seems to be pointing to.
    • monocasa 8y ago
      Chamberlain is cited as a rebuttal to the DMCA argument; the DMCA has nothing to do with trademarks, and therefore I took it's citation to be in reference to it's anti-circumvention clauses. For the trademark argument, see Sega v. Accolade's decision.