MikroBitti 4/1992, pp. 54-55 Online Bits (article series) Pekka Honkanen CASE COMPLEX -- WAS THE NAME AN OMEN? The English word "complex" refers to complicated. There is a court case brewing around a BBS with the same name, where the law will be put into a test. The decisions will be important -- irrespective of whether someone is found guilty or not. A BBS called Complex was founded around the first of May in 1990. In summer 1991 it was reported to the police in order to find out whether it broke the copyright law. At that point, the file area effectively consisted of copies of commercial programs. What stood out was that the BBS kept operating even after the police had contacted its system operator. The case turned even more interesting when it was revealed that the sysop waits for the possible court case with a peaceful mind. Straight from the horse's mouth... ---------------------------------- Most sysops were born in the 1970s. Kari, the sysop of Complex, doesn't fit the stereotype of a common Finnish sysop. He's notably older, yet has only been a computer hobbyist for a relatively short period. He's no enthusiastic programmer or a game freak either. He doesn't earn his living from computers and the whole affair started by accident. Kari: "Everything started when I fell, broke my leg and had to spend a long time with a cast; a friend of mine proposed that I should get that computer now. I did, and after a few months the BBS came online. Before that I didn't know much about computers at all, but by now I know quite a lot." pH: Was the activity like this right from the beginning? "Initially, everything was like on any BBS -- there was messaging, PD software and GIF pictures. At times users would upload commercial software, which seemed to be popular. Little by little I removed GIFs and those programs that you could find anywhere anyway. What remained were commercial programs and eventually there was plenty of them." pH: I've understood that Complex was never on BBS lists? "Never. In addition, the system was so closed that you couldn't get an account even if you had found the number somewhere. The users were strictly forbidden from spreading the number." pH: What about pirate networks? "Complex operated alone. There were requests to join pirate networks, but I wasn't too happy to install front doors and other required programs. Furthermore, people seemed to be more interested in downloading than uploading stuff." pH: They say you collected money from the users? "The money that came from users was invested in hardware, most notably a big hard drive. It wasn't a membership fee, but voluntarily helping the administration." pH: There have been claims of 100 000 marks worth of hardware? "The machine was a 33 MHz 386 with an HST modem and, eventually, a 700 megabyte hard drive. It's still far from 100 000 marks. When I was asked whether the activity of this scale is still a hobby, I answered that it's not even my most expensive hobby!" pH: Don't you think that it was wrong to spread commercial software? "Morally it's not exactly fine. But, in my opinion, it's not illegal either. There is no law that would have made Complex illegal or punishable." pH: You must have had other reasons than just not considering it illegal? "There seemed to be sort of social demand for a BBS like that. For instance, it's useful for youngsters to get to know the software they'll possibly use at work one day. I don't see anything wrong with that. Those guys can't buy such programs." pH: What about the effects on, say, game sales? "Youngsters copying programs is just peanuts. The real problems lie elsewhere." pH: Where? "A small enterprise is interested in an application that costs 10 000 marks. The owner has a friend that gets them a copy of the program for a couple of thousands. Things like that happen all the time and that's where the money is, not kids' game copies." pH: They say that in the Helsinki region there are at least five systems like Complex in operation. Do you know their sysops? "There are others but, understandably, they're pretty quiet at the moment. No more comments..." pH: Have the companies that filed the report been in touch with you? "No. I've exchanged emails with one person, but it happened after the criminal report. The ones who filed the report couldn't enter Complex, which is probably why..." pH: The case may end up in court, but you don't seem worried? If you lose, it may cost a lot. "I have nothing to fear in that respect. This is a hobby and hobbies always cost money. Furthermore, I don't think we'll lose." pH: Why not? The claimants should have no trouble proving what has happened? "I'm not trying to deny what has happened. But it's a completely different question whether I can be convicted of anything. There is no such law, no matter what they try to claim. The details will surface in court, if there ever will even be a hearing." pH: What if you lose anyway? "If the court decides that way, the decision will affect all other BBSs too. Commercial software is not the only copyrighted stuff on BBSs. Some of the BBSs even 'sell' them with a yearly fee or using the 9700 numbers. I guarantee that it'll cause unprecedented tumult." pH: So Complex didn't break the law? "I think not. The matter has been discussed before and even experts haven't been able to conclusively say yes or no." pH: So do you think the copyright law should be improved? "One improvement would be to allow copying programs from original floppies only. Copying a copy wouldn't be legal any more and that alone would remove a lot of unclarity." pH: How's Complex doing now? "Complex is in operation. The file areas are empty, though, but the BBS is online. And it's still not a public system." pH: Do you have advice for someone planning to set up a pirate BBS? "At the moment it's better to lay low and see how the case proceeds." Off the Record -------------- Thus spoke the sysop of Complex. When the case initially became public, many thought it was clear cut: shut down the BBS and arrest the crook. A closer look, however, reveals that the situation is actually much more complicated than that. Kari is prepared to bring to the court a riddle that will take long to solve. Complex will probably be worthy of its name. --- Box: Is the Law Buggy? When the copyright law was renewed, it started to encompass computer software as well. The exact wording is, however, surprisingly vague. It only mentions computer software without making a difference between commercial programs, PD or shareware. The law doesn't forbid copying, as you're allowed to make a few copies for personal use. The copyright law deals with publicly distributing works for profit. The question thus becomes: what is public distribution? Is a BBS with a secret number and relatively few users public? Has there been commercial profit? Is the sysop responsible when a user has uploaded the program? Who will end up in court then: the user, the sysop, both or nobody? Within certain limits, works can even be modified, but is copy protection removal such a modification? The law that was supposed to end discussions on software copying leaves many questions open. The law doesn't always clearly forbid everything. Thus, it's up to different courts and legal experts to apply the law to each case to their best ability. In the case of Complex they're trying to find answers related to copyright and only one thing is sure at this point: whatever the outcome, there will be repercussions. If Complex loses, there'll be more similar court cases -- if it wins, similar systems will pop in numbers. Therefore, many follow the court case and its outcome with keen interest. So far, there have been no clear rules concerning what is ok or not. The practices have been based rather on moral codes and common sense than law. Time will tell whether new amendments are needed before the copyright law can be applied to online communications. Other topical questions have been, for example, whether the sysop can read users' private messages and whether the sysop is responsible for the content of the messages. Do the rules apply the same way to private BBSs as they would to, for instance, governmental services? Is it illegal to use a fake name on a hobbyist BBS? Can magnetically stored material (such as BBS logs) be used as evidence in court? Hopefully the answers to these and many other questions can be found without getting a precedent from a court first. And hopefully the decision-makers then include people who really know the practices of the BBS world.