I don't think it has anything to do with moral rights (which incidentally
have to be protected under the Berne Convention - a French invention, for
sure, but since 1972 part of mainstream international copyright law). This
is boilerplate wording found in many statutes, especially those with a
European origin - e.g. section 3(3)(a) of the [UK] Trade Marks Act 1994: "a
sign shall not be registered if it is ... contrary to public policy or
accepted principles of morality", and Patents Act 9177, section 1(3): "A
patent shall not be granted for an invention the commercial exploitation of
which would be contrary to public policy or morality". Very little case law
on what these provisions mean, although the trade marks provision was
invoked recently as reason to refuse registration of JESUS for jeans (and
upheld by the court).
No comparable statutory provision in copyright law, but common law indicates that copyright will not protect immoral works (Glyn v Weston Feature Film Co [1916] 1 Ch 261). But that is not what the original question is about: I read it as merely taking advantage of the fact that there is an expression on the statute book that appears to do the job the licensor wants done, with at least a little case law surrounding it. What I don't understand is what can be done with a chess program that could ever be considered immoral ...
Peter Groves
Consultant
Bircham Dyson Bell, 50 Broadway, London SW1H 0BL
www.bdb-law.co.uk
Direct line 020 7170 0327
Mobile 07970 175097
-----Original Message-----
From: JFN [mailto:jfnbl[_at_]earthlink.com]
Sent: 04 October 2005 22:01
To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Contrary to Morality - What is that?
It would seem a loose translation of "droit morale" -- the broader rights accorded artists and authors under some European laws to control the exploitation of their works. It comes, I think, from the view that intellectual property ownership and control is a natural right -- a view that is at odds with the American approach, which views it as a statutory grant.
John Noble
At 4:45 PM -0400 10/3/05, S. Martin Keleti wrote:
>At 11:50 AM 10/3/2005, josephpietrojeungriolo[_at_]gmail.com wrote:
>>I encountered a statement in license that I do not fully understand
>>and I am turning to this discussion forum for help in interpreting the
>>statement. As a gift, my wife gave me Chessmaster 10th Edition. After
>>long procrastination, I finally decided to install it in my PC. As
>>the installation was proceeding, the license was presented to me.
>>Because I was going to use the software for my other project, I had to
>>read license very carefully. The portion that stopped me from
>>continuing the installation is this: It is
>>not permitted: - To make copies ...
>>- To operate ... - To use it contrary
>>to morality or the laws in force, -
>>To modify ... - To transmit ...
>>- To create .... - To decompile,
>>reverse engineer or disassemble ... Exactly what does "contrary to
>>morality" mean? I searched Internet and found some references on it.
>>But, all of them are related to patent. I could not find anything
>>relating to the use of software.
>>So, I sent a question on the meaning of "contrary to morality" to Ubi
>>Soft's on-line support. (Ubi Soft is the manufacturer of Chessmaster
>>10th Edition.) After hearing nothing from the on-line support for one
>>or two weeks, I decided to call Ubi Soft's support. I asked the person
>>who answered my call about the meaning of "contrary to morality". He
>>put me on hold for a while (I did not time it but I estimated that it
>>was one or two minutes). He then explained to me that it was a blanket
>>statement to prevent people from breaking any copyright laws. I was
>>tempted to ask him to elaborate that but knowing that he was not
>>expert in legal language, I thanked him for his time and I hanged up
>>phone. I thought more about what he said. If it is really that
>>obvious that "contrary to morality" means breaking any copyright laws,
>>why is this specific wording chosen over other wording? Is this an
>>example where Ubi Soft went overboard and borrowed the language from
>>patent? If "contrary to morality" actually is applicable to
>>Chessmaster, can anyone think of examples where using Chessmaster is
>>contrary to morality? Joseph Pietro Riolo
>><josephpietrojeungriolo[_at_]gmail.com>
>><riolo[_at_]voicenet.com>
>
>
>My understanding of "contrary to morality" is that it is *broader* than
>simply contrary to copyright laws. I've seen the term in discussions of
>civil law jurisdictions (e.g., France, Germany, Switzerland), often
>synonymously with "contrary to public policy." I don't believe that
>it's limited to patent law, but that's just the area in which you came
>across it; it can come up in the field of contracts as well (for
>example, whether contracts relating to gambling are enforceable ), and
>I believe that it comes up in the area of free speech, too.
>
>Given that Ubisoft is headquartered in France
>(http://www.ubisoftgroup.com/AboutUbisoft/Default.aspx?cpid=181),
>its use of this term shouldn't be surprising.
>This kind of boilerplate probably finds its way into many other types
>of legal documents, whether or not any particular application is
>contemplated; but if you should come up with a use of Chessmaster that
>is contrary to morality, Ubisoft's covered. It may have other products
>that are susceptible to such illegal uses, and it's just easier to
>leave that clause in.
>
>
>
>
>
>S. Martin Keleti
>Cohen and Cohen
>740 North La Brea Avenue
>Los Angeles, CA 90038-3339
>323.938.5000
>323.936.6354 fax
>
>
>
>#############################################################
>This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
>To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the
>DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the
>INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your
>subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> To resume mail
>list message delivery from postpone mode, E-mail to
><CNI-COPYRIGHT-feed[_at_]cni.org> Send administrative queries to
><CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
>Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
><https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
#############################################################
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the
DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX
mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your subscription,
E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> To resume mail list message delivery
from postpone mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-feed[_at_]cni.org> Send
administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
For more information about Bircham Dyson Bell, please visit our website: www.bdb-law.co.uk.
Bircham Dyson Bell is regulated by the Law Society.
WARNING - This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not copy or use any part of it or disclose its contents to any person.
If you have received it in error please notify our system manager immediately on +44 20 7227 7000.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:55 GMT