decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
The funny part is, the extra authenticator is optional. | 234 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Bell vs Blizzard, Disagree strongly.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 12 2012 @ 09:47 AM EST
I may have this wrong but I as I understand it: the
authenticator is just to prevent the 'players' computer from
being hacked.

Bizzard uses Warden Client

The program keeps looking at what the player is doing and
reads any other windows the player has open in order
to look for key words – as evidence of cheating.

Blizza rd Entertainment Uses Spyware to Verify EULA Compliance

This leave the players computer open to being hacked.
Hence the need for user-end protection via the Authenticator.

If I'm right, then 'stupid' is not the word I would use for this
law suit.

Off topic: However, quite a few Linux users find that they don't have to worry
about this though. Warden Client doesn't understand the all the API's returned,
so just bans them permanly,
with no reimbursement of the 60 USD.

Lots Of Linux Users Perma-Banned In Diablo 3...Again

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

The funny part is, the extra authenticator is optional.
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 12 2012 @ 11:25 AM EST
So this guy filed a class action suit over an option designed to make his
personal account on Battle.Net safer. Can the world get any more weird?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Remember the Sony Rootkit fiasco
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, November 12 2012 @ 12:16 PM EST

Essentially Blizzard is asking for control of your computer. They may be a
bit more open about (mostly because of the volume of the complaints), but
that is what they want.

So now Joe the Cracker manages to reverse engineer Blizzard's protocols,
and he takes control of your computer...

Yeah, I know that Blizzard is guarding against this. So far they've even
been more successful than Microsoft. But then again, who hasn't?

Al it will take is one failure, like the Sony PS3 account failure, and Blizzard

will have massive problems.

Wayne
http://madhatter.ca

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )