Home
Contact Information
Bio
E-mail: Gail E. Evans
1. Aims
2. Objectives
3. Course Description
4. Syllabus
5. Required Texts
5.1. Selected References
6. Assessment Req.
7. Research Topics
7.1. General Research Area
7.2. Specific Paper Topics
8. Course Methodology
   
Appendix: Research Paper Guidelines
 
Discussion Groups
  Week 1
  Week 2
  Week 3
  Week 4
  Week 4.2
  Week 5.1
  Week 5.2
  Week 6.1
  Week 6.2
  Week 7.1
  Week 7.2
  Week 8.1
  Week 8.2
   

Cyberlaw Readings

The Information Age

Week 6.2: Digital copyright: Case Study: The Computer Games Industry

Required Reading:

Data East USA, Inc. v. Epyx, Inc.: SAIL at 182-185.
Midway Manufacturing Co. v. Artic International, Inc.: SAIL at 206-08.
Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc.: SAIL at 214-
Sega Enterprises Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc.: SAIL at 229-243.
 
 

Optional reading:

Micro Star v. Formgen Inc.: SAIL at 219-226. Is this case really about the scope of the license Formgen granted to the individual users who wrote the MAP files at issue?
Is reverse engineering always fair? See DSC Communications v Pulse Engineering: SAIL at 245.
Samuelson and Scotchmer, The Law and Economics of Reverse Engineering: http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~pam/papers/l&e%20reveng3.pdf

Note: for further references on reverse engineering see: <www.softpanorama.org>

Discussion

1. Does the court in Data East in fact combine the tests for copyrightability and substantial similarity fo r infringement? If so, what is the result for the scope of property in software code?
2. What is the scope of the derivative works right under Midway? Does Midway read the scope too narrowly? SAIL at 201.
3. To what extent does the first sale doctrine in s 109(a) Copyright Act protect makers of "add-on" software? Does it matter whether the software is sold or licensed? SAIL at 210. On the question whether exceeding the scope of a license agreement constitutes copyright infringement or a breach of contract: see Readings Week 5. Does it matter whether the producer uses an electronic copy protection device? See Note on DMCA at SAIL 246.
4. Suppose Nintendo had announced its intention to sell add-on devices to its entertainment system that would perform the same function as the Game Genie; should this fact change the fair use analysis? SAIL at 218.
5. Do you agree with the Sega court's analysis of the fourth fair use factor? SAIL at 245.
6. Problems 2.4 and 2.9.
7. Is standardization a valid rationale for copying? SAIL at 245. Is the fair use doctrine an appropriate means of encouraging standardization or compatibility? SAIL at 246.
8. Is Sega entitled to control not only the sales of its copyrighted software cut alos the video games that will run the Sega system?
9. Should the ease of reverse engineering affect the copyright equation?