Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> The Patry Copyright Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Intellectual Property Law
: The Patry Copyright BlogUS Government Insists on Right to Violate DMCA
By Senior Copyright Counsel, Google Inc.
Congress abrogated the federal government?s sovereign immunity for copyright infringement in 28 USC 1498(c), but a DMCA anti-circumvention violation is not an infringement action; instead, chapter 12 of title 17 is a sui generis right, like semiconductor chips, bootlegging, and vessel boat hull protection. There is no express abrogation of sovereign immunity for DMCA violations, and thus the US government is free to ? and appears quite happy to ? engage in activity, which if done by individuals or companies, would be illegal, perhaps even criminal. The hypocrisy in the US government?s conduct is breathtaking given USTR?s vigorous efforts to peddle the DMCA internationally. Where are the IIPA, BSA, and other ?pro-IP? groups on this scandalous treatment of creators? Will they now press for an amendment to 1498(b) to include violations of the DMCA?
The facts in the Blueport case fully support the sense of outrage we should all have over this situation. I will simply copy them verbatim from the CAFC?s opinion so there is no slanting of them. After reading them, ask yourself whether we should ever believe again government officials who talk about the importance of intellectual property:
BACKGROUND
In this case, Blueport claims that the Government-specifically the U.S. Air Force-infringed Blueport's copyright on a software program known as ?the AUMD program.? The AUMD program was written by Air Force Technical Sergeant Mark Davenport. On March 6, 2000, Davenport assigned all his rights in the AUMD program to Blueport.
When Davenport wrote the AUMD program, he was employed as a manager of the Air Force Manpower Data System (?MDS?), a database containing manpower profiles for each unit in the Air Force. In his capacity as an MDS Manager, Davenport updated the MDS with new data and provided reports from the MDS to Air Force personnel upon request. Davenport was also a member of the Air Force's Manpower User Group, a group of manpower personnel from each of the Air Force's major commands who provided guidance on the use of the MDS. Based on his experience with the MDS, Davenport concluded that the software the Air Force used to run the MDS was inefficient and began seeking ways to redesign the software program. Davenport initially requested training in computer programming from the Air Force, but his request was denied. Undeterred, Davenport learned the computer programming skills necessary to write the AUMD program on his own time and with his own resources. Davenport then wrote the source code for the AUMD program while at home on his personal computer. Although he wrote the program solely at his home and at his own initiative, Davenport's intent in writing the program was that other Air Force manpower personnel would use it.
In June 1998, Davenport shared an early version of the program with a fellow coworker, and both tested the program on the MDS at work during regular business hours. Based on the results of this testing, Davenport made changes to the source code of the AUMD program on his home computer. Davenport did not at that time, or at any time thereafter, bring the AUMD program's source code to work or copy it onto Air Force computers.
After these initial tests, Davenport began sharing copies of the AUMD program with other colleagues. At first, Davenport shared the AUMD program with colleagues by giving them a computer disk containing the program or by personally installing the program on their computers. Later, Davenport posted the AUMD program on an Air Force web page so that Air Force manpower personnel could download it directly. As the program became popular within the Air Force manpower community, Davenport's superiors asked him to train additional personnel in its use. During this time, he continued to modify the program based on feedback he received and, as a result, improved its functionality and eliminated programming errors. At some point, Davenport added an automatic expiration date to each new version of the AUMD program so that users were required to download the newest version when the older one expired.
In September 1998, Davenport gave a presentation to senior Air Force manpower officers at an annual conference and, according to one of Davenport's superiors, ?absolutely sold his audience? on the AUMD program. Davenport's performance report deemed him the ?go to troubleshooter for [the] entire [Air Force] manpower community ... [and] the most knowledgeable database manager in [the] career field.? The performance report concluded with a recommendation to promote Davenport immediately.
Despite Davenport's success in creating the AUMD program and his willingness to share it, the Air Force eventually decided it was becoming too dependent on Davenport for access to the program. Accordingly, Davenport's superiors asked him to turn over the source code for the program, which Davenport had always kept on his home computer. When he refused to turn over the source code, his superiors threatened him with a demotion and a pay cut, and excluded him from the Manpower User Group's advisory authority.
Davenport then assigned all his rights in the AUMD program to Blueport. Subsequently, Blueport attempted to negotiate a license agreement with the Air Force. However, the Air Force refused Blueport's offer and solicited other contractors to recreate the AUMD program. The Air Force ultimately contracted with Science Applications International Corporation (?SAIC?). At the request of the Air Force, SAIC programmers modified the AUMD program's object code to extend its expiration date. This modification allowed Air Force manpower personnel to continue to use the AUMD program despite Davenport's refusal to provide the source code.
In 2002, Blueport brought the present claims against the Government for copyright infringement and violations of the DMCA. Specifically, Blueport argues that the Air Force infringed its copyright in the AUMD program. In addition, Blueport argues that the Air Force violated the DMCA by extending the expiration date in the AUMD program's object code-thus circumventing the measures taken by Blueport to prevent unauthorized use of the program. The CFC dismissed Blueport's claims for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the Government had not waived its sovereign immunity for any of the claims. Blueport now appeals.
Full post as published by The Patry Copyright Blog on July 30, 2008 (boomark / email).
The Paulson Toxic Mortgage Debt Security Act: The Biggest Government Bailout of All Time
Legislative Proprosal for Treasury Authority to Purchase Mortgage-related Assets
Qui Tam Whistleblower - Government Fraud - Qui Tam Lawsuit
Qui Tam Whistleblower alleging fraud against the government reported by an individual acting as a government whistleblower.
Canadian Government
seeks new law enabling them to search your laptop
Federal Government
alleging discrimination against black farmers
US Government
alleging land surveyors should not be allowed on private property to build a US Mexican border wall.
US Federal Government
allegedly violated the niversal Declaration of Human Rights by deporting undocumented parents of US born children.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
alleging government agencies and officials violated immigrant workers' constitutional rights.

Canada Elects Minority Government, Could Avoid Canadian DMCA Again
Air Force DMCA-Bombs YouTubed Ad
YouTube, the DMCA and politics — again
Canadian DMCA Tabled - File-sharers Could Get Fined $500 Per Infringement







