Tektronix Uses DMCA Notice To Try To Stop Oscilloscope Hacking
from the freedom-to-tinker dept
Another day, another abuse of the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions to stop things that have nothing whatsoever to do with copyright. As pointed out by Slashdot, the Hackaday site recently had a post about how to clone some Tektronix application modules for its MSO2000 line of oscilloscopes. The post explained a simple hack to enable the application module to do a lot more. And... in response, Tektronix sent a DMCA takedown notice demanding the entire post be taken down.I am the Chief Intellectual Property Counsel at Test & Measurement group of companies including Tektronix, Inc.Hackaday didn't remove the entire post, but did basically remove all of the details. While the takedown doesn't say so, it appears that Tektronix is likely relying on a distorted reading of the DMCA's Section 1201, which is the anti-circumvention clause. Of course, court rulings have not been kind to hardware companies looking to use Section 1201 in a similar manner, but it's doubtful that a site like Hackaday feels like getting in a legal fight with Tektronix.
I have been notified of a posting on the “Hack A Day” website concerning hacking of Tektronix’ copyrighted modules for use in oscilloscopes. Hacking those modules permits unauthorized access to and use of Tektronix’ copyrighted software by means of copying of Tektronix’ copyrighted code in those modules.
http://hackaday.com/2014/07/28/cloning-tektronix-application-modules/
A copy of the offending posting is attached for your reference.
The posting includes instructions for how to hack our modules and thereby violate Tektronix’ copyrights.
Tektronix has a good faith belief that there is no legal basis for this individual to provide such instructions to anyone, much less on a public forum.
I hereby submit that the above statements are true and accurate, and under penalty of perjury state that I am authorized to act on Tektronix’ behalf.
In view of the above, Tektronix demands that the posting identified above be expeditiously removed from the website.
Very Truly Yours,
And, of course, that's why the DMCA is such a dangerous and overly broad tool. It allows bullies like Tektronix to take down useful information that actually makes its own devices more useful, all because of misguided beliefs about the importance of "protecting" your "intellectual property," rather than making your products more useful and valuable to a wider audience.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, dmca, freedom to tinker, hacking, oscilliscope
Companies: hackaday, tektronix
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Let's break that down:
1) The posting includes instructions
Clearly, these instructions were not created by Tektronix so they don't have a copyright claim there.
2) how to hack our modules
So nothing to do with copyright since writing a hack would at least be creating something new if someone really wanted to claim copyright on their code
3) and thereby violate Tektronix’ copyrights
Ah - there it is - the old 'copyright enabling'. Now I get it - those bastards are enabling something that could allow someone to copy. We should go after everyone for this - let's start with the pencil makers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When your business model is built on copyright it's not a business model. Tektronics attempted to extract additional money from customers by 'adding features' to a standard hardware profile; too bad customers were smarter.
+1 for the consumer!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They are not claiming copyright on the instructions. They are claiming that the instructions violate the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA. That clause specifically forbids telling people how to circumvent controls that restrict access to copyrighted material.
"So nothing to do with copyright"
Their claim has everything to do with copyright since the DMCA is copyright law.
Whether on not their claim is supportable is a different question, but it is legally coherent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Are you sure? What part of the DMCA forbids instruction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
17 U.S. Code § 1201 - Circumvention of copyright protection systems (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201) and nowhere does it mention discussing or providing instructions.
As far as I can tell, the author of the article isn't offering anything covered: manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course there's no legal basis for this, such as, you know, things like freedom of speech, fair use, and extraterritoriality protections. That would stop us from instituting a permissions culture!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
additionally, does the anti-circumvention provision actually apply to instructions, or does it only apply to actual acts? Have fun improving inducement!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There's a growing disconnect between what people believe is moral, and what is actually legal. Then you throw the US First Amendment into a case like this. Douglas MacArthur said "Never give an order that can't be obeyed." He new it did nothing but undermine his own authority to do so. If only everyone else in government would learn the same thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There's a growing disconnect between what people believe is moral, and what is actually legal.
Many times on Techdirt, the moral issues of piracy and copyright and such have been discussed, and every time it's slapped down as not being relevant. I personally think it's very important.
The real disconnect here is that people would not break a padlock to gain entry to something, but have no problem sticking an extra board in their xbox or replacing the eprom on their scope to accomplish the same thing. The true moral issue is that while people generally are against ill gotten gains (I don't use the word stealing because the usual suspects will jump down my throat), they don't see the stuff obtained through digital means to be the same. That is the true moral disconnect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Isn't the constitution the basis of your law?
"Your rights don't extent to the point of harming the rights of others."
So, why do you consistently support the rights of corporations to violate the rights of ordinary citizens?
"The real disconnect here is that people would not break a padlock to gain entry to something, but have no problem sticking an extra board in their xbox or replacing the eprom on their scope to accomplish the same thing."
Oh dear, you're full of shit again. What a surprise.
People would most certainly not have a problem breaking a padlock into something THAT THEY OWN. People also have no problem hacking and altering equipment THAT THEY OWN.
Do you not see the problem here yet, or are you too busy lying again to see that actual arguments made by other people?
"The true moral issue is that while people generally are against ill gotten gains (I don't use the word stealing because the usual suspects will jump down my throat), they don't see the stuff obtained through digital means to be the same."
Yes, we'll jump down your throat whenever you not only lie, but make false claims about others here. Why should I not gain entry to the things that I have paid money for?
Stop making shit up and deal with reality, please. The people you argue with are paying customers, not thieves. I'm sorry if that's too difficult for you to grasp, but you're the only dishonest person here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I think you are the one with a bit of disconnect myself. Your analogy is flawed.
By saying "people would not break a padlock to gain entry to something" is misleading. True, most people wouldn't break a padlock to gain entry to someone else's property.
Now ask all those same people if they would break a padlock on a lockbox they purchased legally at the flea market, estate sale or storage unit auction.
You are failing to include the fact that people are modify their own property that's physically in their possession.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Funny thing is, he isn't. Look at his wording:
"have no problem sticking an extra board in THEIR xbox or replacing the eprom on THEIR scope to accomplish the same thing." (emphasis mine, of course)
Either he so ignorant of the argument that he's actually making the point for us, or he's deliberately trying to conflate modifying hardware you own with digital piracy. But, whether deliberately or subconsciously, his wording admits that it's about hardware that people own.
This is the kind of dishonesty I call him out on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Then the problem is with the law, not with the people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I interpreted their argument a little differently -- I don't think they were saying that the SKU was the protected software, but that the SKU was protecting software in the oscilloscope itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Title typo
*Oscilloscope
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Streisand Effect
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are all easter egg instructions in violation too?
Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tektronix Ad
Yeah, this article might make us look a little bad, but go check out our O-scopes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Tektronix Ad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Too Little, Too Late
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Too Little, Too Late
> sooner rather than later.
> We're talking about Engineers, here,
Uh, No. You're wrong.
We're talking Dilbert's boss here. PHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Too Little, Too Late
It's not unlike when people were able to convert Windows NT Workstation to Windows NT Server with a registry hack.
Artificial technical limitations are fair game, as far as I'm concerned - using copyright to prevent people from finding and "fixing" these limitations is absolutely ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Too Little, Too Late
The intention is the same as M$, that everybody use your products pirated or not. It's a very serious competitive advantage even with the small lost of revenue of those that wasn't going to buy anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They should stop being lazy
They don't want to go through the hassle of ordering different sized ROM chips for the different model features (so someone can't flash better firmware on to a cheaper one). Ideally with different electrical characteristics, so you can't just swap it out.
Stop being lazy!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The code in question was already resident in the oscilloscope.
There was no copying involved. (Any argument about "copying" from flash to RAM to instruction decoder has no legal relevance. The established precedent is that if such transfers are needed to make use of the distribution media, the transfers are not 'copying' for the purposes of copyright law.
The only thing this "hack" does is change a single number, the SKU number. It doesn't provide a decryption key, or teach a new algorithm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is the electronic equivalent of using 1234 as the password to your safe...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
thanks for the justification!
No DMCA issues in my scopes :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
$20 of parts apparently makes a $500 add on board
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet failsafe activated
Search and you will find it - the Chief Intellectual Property Counsel at Test & Measurement appears to have very little understanding of technology if he thinks that this is all that is required to remove said redacted information from the hands and minds of those who want to use it. One minute to find it, one minute to download it and one minute to bind it in my local storage media.
I dinna own a Tek, but have stored the knowledge for someone else's rainy day.
David Oliver Graeme Samuel Offenbach
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet never forget...
https://web.archive.org/web/20140728140425/https://hackaday.com/2014/07/28/cloning-tektron ix-application-modules/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]