Davidson & Associates v. Jung

Decision Date01 September 2005
Docket NumberNo. 04-3654.,04-3654.
Citation422 F.3d 630
PartiesDAVIDSON & ASSOCIATES, doing business as Blizzard Entertainment, Inc.; Vivendi Universal, Inc., Plaintiffs — Appellees, v. Tim JUNG, an individual; Rob Crittenden, Defendants — Appellants, Intellectual Property Law Professors, Amicus Curiae, Internet Gateway, Defendants — Appellants, Computer & Communications Industry Association; Open Source & Industry Alliance; Consumers Union; Public Knowledge; Intellectual Property Law Professors; The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., Amici on Behalf of Appellants, Entertainment Software Association; Recording Industry Association of America; Motion Picture Association of America, Incorporated; Data Tree, LLC; First American Real Estate Solutions, LLC; Reed Elsevier, Inc. Twenty-Second Century Foundation, Inc.; Software & Information Industry Association, Amici on Behalf of Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Paul S. Grewal, argued, Cupertino, CA (Robert M. Galvin and Richard C. Lin, Cupertino, CA, Jason M. Schultz, San Francisco, CA, Mark Sableman and Matthew Braunel, St. Louis, MO, on the brief), for appellant.

Stephen H. Rovak, argued, St. Louis, MO (Kirill Y. Abramov, St. Louis, MO, Carol Anne Been and Gerald E. Fradin, Chicago, IL, on the brief), for appellee.

Before MURPHY, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

SMITH, Circuit Judge.

Davidson & Associates, Inc. d/b/a Blizzard Entertainment ("Blizzard") and Vivendi Universal Games, Inc. ("Vivendi"), owner of copyrights in computer game software and online gaming service software sued Ross Combs ("Combs"), Rob Crittenden ("Crittenden"), Jim Jung ("Jung"), and Internet Gateway, Inc. ("Internet Gateway") (collectively referred to as "Appellants"), for breach of contract, circumvention of copyright protection system, and trafficking in circumvention technology. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Blizzard and Vivendi, and determined that: (1) Blizzard's software end-user license and terms of usage agreements were enforceable contracts; (2) Appellants waived any "fair use" defense; (3) the agreements did not constitute misuse of copyright; and (4) Appellants violated the anti-circumvention and anti-trafficking provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"). We affirm.

I. Background
A. Factual Background

Blizzard, a California corporation and subsidiary of Vivendi, creates and sells software games for personal computers. This appeal concerns the particular Blizzard games "StarCraft," "StarCraft: Brood War," "WarCraft II: Battle.net Edition," "Diablo," and "Diablo II: Lord of Destruction." Combs and Crittenden are computer programmers, Jung is a systems administrator, and Internet Gateway is an Internet service provider based in St. Peters, Missouri. Jung is also the president, co-owner, and day-to-day operator of Internet Gateway.

In January 1997, Blizzard officially launched "Battle.net," a 24-hour online-gaming service available exclusively to purchasers of its computer games. The Battle.net service has nearly 12 million active users who spend more that 2.1 million hours online per day. Blizzard holds valid copyright registrations covering Battle.net and each of its computer games at issue in this litigation. Battle.net is a free service that allows owners of Blizzard games to play each other on their personal computers via the Internet. Battle.net mode allows users to create and join multi-player games that can be accessed across the Internet, to chat with other potential players, to record wins and losses and save advancements in an individual password-protected game account, and to participate with others in tournament play featuring elimination rounds.1 Players can set up private "chat channels" and private games on Battle.net to allow players to determine with whom they wish to interact online. These Battle.net mode features are only accessible from within the games.

Like most computer software, Blizzard's games can be easily copied and distributed over the Internet. Blizzard has taken steps to avoid piracy by designing Battle.net to restrict access and use of the Battle.net mode feature of the game. Each time a user logs onto Battle.net, a Battle.net server examines the user's version of the game software. If a Blizzard game does not have the latest software upgrades and fixes, the Battle.net service updates the customer's game before allowing the game to play in Battle.net mode.

With the exception of "Diablo," each authorized version of a Blizzard game comes with a "CD Key." A CD Key is a unique sequence of alphanumeric characters printed on a sticker attached to the case in which the CD-ROM was packaged.2 To log on to Battle.net and access Battle.net mode, the game initiates an authentication sequence or "secret handshake" between the game and the Battle.net server.3 In order to play the Blizzard game contained on a CD-ROM, a user must first install the game onto a computer and agree to the terms of the End User License Agreement ("EULA")4 and Terms of Use ("TOU"),5 both of which prohibit reverse engineering. At the end of both the EULA and TOU, Blizzard includes a button with the text, "I Agree" in it, which the user must select in order to proceed with the installation. Users are also required to enter a name and the CD Key during installation of Battle.net and Blizzard games.

The outside packaging of all Blizzard games, except for Diablo, contains a statement that use of the game is subject to the EULA and that use of Battle.net is subject to the terms of the TOU. The terms of neither the EULA nor the TOU appear on the outside packaging. If the user does not agree to these terms, the game may be returned for a full refund of the purchase price within thirty (30) days of the original purchase. Combs, Crittenden, and Jung installed Blizzard games and agreed to the terms of the EULA. Crittenden and Jung logged onto Battle.net and agreed to the TOU.

The users of Battle.net have occasionally experienced difficulties with the service.6 To address their frustrations with Battle.net, a group of non-profit volunteer game hobbyists, programmers, and other individuals formed a group called the "bnetd project." The bnetd project developed a program called the "bnetd.org server" that emulates the Battle.net service and permits users to play online without use of Battle.net. The bnetd project is a volunteer effort and the project has always offered the bnetd program for free to anyone. Combs, Crittenden, and Jung were lead developers for the bnetd project.

The bnetd project was organized and managed over the Internet through a website, www.bnetd.org, that was made available to the public through equipment provided by Internet Gateway. The bnetd.org emulator provides a server that allows gamers unable or unwilling to connect to Battle.net to experience the multi-player features of Blizzard's games. The bnetd.org emulator also provides matchmaking services for users of Blizzard games who want to play those games in a multi-player environment without using Battle.net. Bnetd.org attempted to mirror all of the user-visible features of Battle.net, including online discussion forums and information about the bnetd project, as well as access to the program's computer code for others to copy and modify.

To serve as a functional alternative to Battle.net, bnetd.org had to be compatible with Blizzard's software. In particular, compatibility required that bnetd.org speak the same protocol language that the Battle.net speaks. By speaking the same protocol language, the bnetd programs would be interoperable with Blizzard games. Once game play starts, a user perceives no difference between Battle.net and the bnetd.org.

By necessity, Appellants used reverse engineering to learn Blizzard's protocol language and to ensure that bnetd.org worked with Blizzard games. Combs used reverse engineering to develop the bnetd.org server, including a program called "tcpdump" to log communications between Blizzard games and the Battle.net server. Crittenden used reverse engineering to develop the bnetd.org server, including using a program called "Nextray." Crittenden also used a program called "ripper" to take Blizzard client files that were compiled together in one file and break them into their component parts. Crittenden used the ripper program to determine how Blizzard games displayed ad banners so that bnetd.org could display ad banners to users in the format that Blizzard uses on the Battle.net service. Combs tried to disassemble a Blizzard game to figure out how to implement a feature that allowed bnetd.org to protect the password that a user enters when creating an account in Battle.net mode. Crittenden made an unauthorized copy of a Blizzard game in order to test the interoperability of the bnetd.org server with multiple games.

Blizzard designed its games to connect only to Battle.net servers. To enable a Blizzard game to connect to a bnetd.org server instead of a Battle.net server, bnetd had to modify the computer file that contained the Internet address of the Battle.net servers. As part of the bnetd project, Combs participated in the development of a utility program called "BNS" to allow Blizzard games to connect to bnetd.org servers more easily. Through the BNS program, the game sends the bnetd.org server information about its CD Key. An individual can thus play one of the Blizzard games at issue over the Internet via bnetd.org rather than Battle.net. According to Blizzard, the EULAs and TOUs prohibit this activity.

Bnetd.org has important operational differences from Battle.net.7 When bnetd.org receives the CD Key information, unlike Battle.net, it does not determine whether the CD Key is valid or currently in use by another player. The bnetd.org server computer code always sends the game an "okay" reply regardless of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
212 cases
  • Redlich v. City of St. Louis
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • 22 Julio 2021
    ...Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) (emphasis added); Davidson & Assoc. v. Jung , 422 F.3d 630, 638 (8th Cir. 2005) ; Smith v. International Paper Co. 523 F.3d 845, 848 (8th Cir. 2008) (the nonmoving party must "substantiate his allegati......
  • Trulogic, Inc. v. Gen. Elec. Co.
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • 20 Agosto 2021
    ...from one for copyright.’ " Davidson & Assocs., Inc. v. Internet Gateway, Inc. , 334 F.Supp.2d 1164, 1175 (E.D. Mo. 2004), aff'd , 422 F.3d 630 (8th Cir. 2005), quoting Natl. Car Rental Sys., Inc. , 991 F.2d at 433. During the subsequent appeal in Davidson , the Eighth Circuit Court of Appea......
  • Scott v. Union Pac. R.R. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • 31 Marzo 2022
    ...Cir. 2010) (self-serving allegations and denials are insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact); Davidson & Assocs. v. Jung , 422 F.3d 630, 638 (8th Cir. 2005) ("A plaintiff may not merely point to unsupported self-serving allegations, but must substantiate allegations with su......
  • Rouse v. Walter & Associates, L.L.C.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Iowa
    • 20 Septiembre 2007
    ...allegations with sufficient probative evidence that would permit a finding in the plaintiffs favor." Davidson & Associates v. Jung, 422 F.3d 630, 638 (8th Cir.2005). The record demonstrates that there are no genuine issues of material fact regarding whether USOFT was work for hire under the......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 books & journal articles
  • Tidying up the Internet: Takedown of Unauthorized Content under Copyright, Trademark, and Defamation Law
    • United States
    • Capital University Law Review No. 41-2, March 2013
    • 1 Marzo 2013
    ...from what was required by the duty in a way which reflects more than a pretense of bargain.”). 120 See, e.g. , Davidson & Assocs. v. Jung, 422 F.3d 630, 639 (8th Cir. 2005); ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447, 1448–49 (7th Cir. 1996); see also Mark A. Lemley, Intellectual Property and ......
  • Copyright and Trademark Misuse
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Intellectual Property Misuse: Licensing and Litigation. Second Edition
    • 6 Diciembre 2020
    ...2d 1164, 1181 (E.D. Mo. 2004) (recognizing copyright misuse as a valid affirmative defense), aff’d sub nom. Davidson & Assocs. v. Jung, 422 F.3d 630 (8th Cir. 2005); Schoolhouse, Inc. v. Anderson, 2001 WL 1640081, at *7 (D. Minn. 2001) (finding copyright misuse generally recognized as an eq......
  • Tidying up the Internet: Takedown of Unauthorized Content under Copyright, Trademark, and Defamation Law
    • United States
    • Capital University Law Review No. 41-3, June 2013
    • 1 Junio 2013
    ...from what was required by the duty in a way which reflects more than a pretense of bargain.”). 120 See, e.g. , Davidson & Assocs. v. Jung, 422 F.3d 630, 639 (8th Cir. 2005); ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447, 1448–49 (7th Cir. 1996); see also Mark A. Lemley, Intellectual Property and ......
  • Computer crimes.
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review Vol. 47 No. 2, March 2010
    • 22 Marzo 2010
    ...only when encrypted data was read from authorized CD-ROMs, likely violated [section] 1201); see also Davidson & Assoc. v. Jung, 422 F.3d 630 (8th Cir. 2005) (holding that the computer game purchasers' development of an alternative to the sellers' online gaming service, which allowed oth......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT