Hacking Is 7.00 fully decrypted?

[smf]

I did go through enough of the DMCA earlier today. It still doesn't prevent users from jailbreaking consoles. It only allows vendors like Apple or Sony to sue if someone is distributing their code

Then you haven't understood anything that you've been reading. You should not get confused between the two parts of the DMCA.

One half makes it illegal to distribute anything or tell anyone how to circumvent DRM. No copyright infringement needs to take place, it even overrides fair use copyright laws & so you could have the right to back something up but not to buy something that allows you to play the backup. There is room for DMCA exemptions to be granted, one has been granted for mobile phones. FSF requested an exemption for consoles, but it was denied because of the threat of rampant piracy. https://odinlaw.com/what-is-dmca-anti-circumvention/

The other half covers take down notices for copyright infringement.

which is ironic because Sony distributes their code anyway.

How is it ironic? Copyright means you have rights to control all copies.

 

[johnma2]

Then you haven't understood anything that you've been reading. You should not get confused between the two parts of the DMCA.

One half makes it illegal to distribute anything or tell anyone how to circumvent DRM. No copyright infringement needs to take place, it even overrides fair use copyright laws & so you could have the right to back something up but not to buy something that allows you to play the backup. There is room for DMCA exemptions to be granted, one has been granted for mobile phones. FSF requested an exemption for consoles, but it was denied because of the threat of rampant piracy. https://odinlaw.com/what-is-dmca-anti-circumvention/

The other half covers take down notices for copyright infringement.



How is it ironic? Copyright means you have rights to control all copies.

I wasn't confusing anything about the DMCA, I do understand it. Notice how Sony only won that lawsuit because GeoHot distributed the keys necessary to allow for the overall jailbreaking of the PS3. He didn't lose the case because jailbroken PS3s could backup and play games. If this had been the case, then companies would not be selling external hard drives for consoles, much less replacement hard drives. You would have to buy a whole new system. Also why Nintendo has never won a lawsuit for that purpose too, that is, any of their consoles being able to back up and play cartridges. Plus, it's only illegal in the sense you're talking about if you're backing up games AND distributing them. If you're backing up yur own games to use yourself, then there's nothing wrong with it.

 

[smf]

I wasn't confusing anything about the DMCA, I do understand it. Notice how Sony only won that lawsuit because GeoHot distributed the keys necessary to allow for the overall jailbreaking of the PS3.

You seem to be confused about copyright law now. You know you can't copyright keys? They are too short and have no creative expression.

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf

The DMCA made it illegal to distribute the keys because they bypass DRM.
If the algorithm permitted another equivalent key to achieve the same functionality then it would still have been illegal even though Sony had never published that key themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number

Had the DMCA not been bought into effect, anyone could have published those keys legally.

https://www.engadget.com/2011/01/12/sony-follows-up-officially-sues-geohot-and-fail0verflow-over-ps/

Sony alleges that George Hotz, Hector Martin Cantero, Sven Peter, and the rest of fail0verflow are:

• Violating §1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which forbids bypassing access control measures;
• Violating the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which forbids accessing computers without authorization;
• Guilty of contributory copyright infringement for encouraging and helping others to crack PS3s as well;
• Violating the California Computer Crime Law, which is the state computer fraud act (think of this as a backup fraud claim);
• Violating the PlayStation Network's Terms of Service (which feels meaningless, really);
• Interfering with Sony's relationships with other PSN customers (also meaningless);
• Trespassing on Sony's ownership right to the PS3 (this one feels weak) and;
• Misappropriating Sony's intellectual property (another weak argument, but there in case the copyright argument fails).

F0f were included because distributing the instructions on how to extract the keys from a PS3 you legally own, is equivalent under the DMCA to distributing the keys themselves.



Some more reading of DMCA that covers PS3 and other cases

https://www.eff.org/files/2014/09/16/unintendedconsequences2014.pdf

The real irony is that geohotz tried to avoid piracy by not including the syscalls necessary to run the psjailbreak backup loader. But what he'd released allowed others to do it, so he was still on the hook legally.

 

[johnma2]

You seem to be confused about copyright law now. You know you can't copyright keys? They are too short and have no creative expression.

https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf

The DMCA made it illegal to distribute the keys because they bypass DRM.
If the algorithm permitted another equivalent key to achieve the same functionality then it would still have been illegal even though Sony had never published that key themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number

Had the DMCA not been bought into effect, anyone could have published those keys legally.

https://www.engadget.com/2011/01/12/sony-follows-up-officially-sues-geohot-and-fail0verflow-over-ps/

Sony alleges that George Hotz, Hector Martin Cantero, Sven Peter, and the rest of fail0verflow are:

• Violating §1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which forbids bypassing access control measures;
• Violating the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which forbids accessing computers without authorization;
• Guilty of contributory copyright infringement for encouraging and helping others to crack PS3s as well;
• Violating the California Computer Crime Law, which is the state computer fraud act (think of this as a backup fraud claim);
• Violating the PlayStation Network's Terms of Service (which feels meaningless, really);
• Interfering with Sony's relationships with other PSN customers (also meaningless);
• Trespassing on Sony's ownership right to the PS3 (this one feels weak) and;
• Misappropriating Sony's intellectual property (another weak argument, but there in case the copyright argument fails).

F0f were included because distributing the instructions on how to extract the keys from a PS3 you legally own, is equivalent under the DMCA to distributing the keys themselves.



Some more reading of DMCA that covers PS3 and other cases

https://www.eff.org/files/2014/09/16/unintendedconsequences2014.pdf

The real irony is that geohotz tried to avoid piracy by not including the syscalls necessary to run the psjailbreak backup loader. But what he'd released allowed others to do it, so he was still on the hook legally.

Not really that confused about anything, because every article I've seen so far talks about Sony suing Geo because of the keys. This is the main example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hotz
Not every can edit the articles on Wikipedia you know. Nearly all edits have to be approved by the author. There's also the references at the bottom of the page to look into as well.

Edit: However, I noticed that we got way off topic, so let's get back to it. I personally don't see as much relevance in this towards what the OP is looking for. I do apologize to the OP for that.

 

[smf]

Not really that confused about anything, because every article I've seen so far talks about Sony suing Geo because of the keys.

That was part of their evidence, because he did it and they could prove it. However they sued him for DMCA anti circumvention, he didn't need to release the keys to have violated the DMCA & they would still have sued him.

https://www.wired.com/2011/04/sony-settles-ps3-lawsuit/

Respected for his iPhone hacks and now the PlayStation 3 jailbreak, Hotz was accused of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and other laws, after he published an encryption key and software tools on his website in January that allow Playstation owners to gain complete control of their consoles from the firmware on up.

There's also the references at the bottom of the page to look into as well.

Like this one.

https://blog.us.playstation.com/2011/04/11/settlement-in-george-hotz-case/

In the action, SCEA accused Hotz of violating federal law by posting online information about the security system in the PlayStation 3 videogame console and software that SCEA claimed could be used to circumvent the security system in the console and allow the playing of pirated videogames.