
Hacker Mods Old Calculator to Access the Internet, Casio Files DMCA Complaint - fraqed
https://torrentfreak.com/hacker-mods-old-calculator-to-access-the-internet-casio-files-dmca-complaint-200523/
======
robotmay
This isn't the only bad PR tactic I've seen from Casio lately. There's a piano
reviewer on YouTube who noticed a flaw in the action of a new digital piano
they make, and their responses varied from claiming he was lying to
_reportedly_ spamming his videos with negative comments. Here's the 3 relevant
videos where he first raises the issue, responds to Casio, then just straight
up dismantles the piano and proves it:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7xHgXFEJUE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7xHgXFEJUE)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAfScFK0QU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAfScFK0QU)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqNK3w-2C6I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqNK3w-2C6I)

~~~
cosmojg
Whelp, Casio has officially made its way onto my list of brands to never buy.

~~~
Y_Y
whelp

noun

the young of the dog, or of the wolf, bear, lion, tiger, seal, etc.

~~~
fhars
Dictionary error.
[https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=whelp](https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=whelp)

------
souterrain
The following changes should be made to DMCA:

1\. Forbid delegation of enforcement to third parties. If you’re the copyright
holder, you or your actual attorney may be the only ones to file a complaint.
The copyright holder is solely responsible for such DMCA complaints.

2\. Complaints found to be invalid shall result in reimbursement by the
copyright holder an amount equal to three times the costs incurred to defend
the complaint, including time, legal fees, etc., to the aggrieved party.

3\. Three strike rule: if a copyright holder commits a false complaint action
three times for a particular work, that work’s copyright is immediately
invalidated and shall revert to the public domain.

~~~
ikeboy
1\. There's no reason to prohibit agent relationships, as long as liability
attaches to the rights owner.

2\. Strict liability is a good idea, but the exact amount should be up to
discretion of the court. Some cases are more egregious than others.

3\. This needs to be a ratio. If thousands of complaints are valid, it should
require more than 3 mistaken ones. And the penalty is too harsh. Instead, they
should be required to actually sue to enforce their copyright, instead of
filing complaints.

~~~
cortesoft
Yeah, #3 sounds like an invitation for abuse... keep submitting work designed
to trick rights holders into submitting claims until you get three. If you
have infinite chances, you will eventually get them to strike 3 invalid
claims.

~~~
tehwebguy
Can rights holders be tricked into committing perjury?

Seems like they‘d have to do this on their own with no prompt from anyone
else.

~~~
tspiteri
They can be made to be convicted of perjury. If you have enough trials, you're
going to be falsely convicted a few times.

~~~
tehwebguy
Sure but not at all what we are talking about here

------
tomxor
> I am writing on behalf of CASIO [...] The code the repository contains is
> proprietary and not to be publicly published. The hosted content is a
> direct, literal copy of our client’s work. I hereby summon you to take
> expeditious action: to remove or to disable access to the infringing content
> immediately, but in any case no later than ten days as of today.

The code is not even for the calculator, it's for a "esp8266-12E" which is an
arduino-like board. This has more to do with the plastic case than electronics
or code:

If you watch the video of the modification to the calculator at the bottom of
the article you can see the only thing the calculator board appears to share
is a power source - this is essentially a duct tape mod that went to the
effort of fitting a separate computer and display inside of the case. If you
can find a fork (git links in the comments) you will also notice that it's all
arduino code.

Casio simply dislikes the mod because it adds a separate computer to their
exam-approved calculator case, turning it into something only suited to
formative assessment while being difficult to differentiate from the original.
However the repo has pretty much nothing to do with their calculator other
than the fact that it was once used on an arduino board that was glued inside
of a casio calculator in a youtube video - IANAL but pretty sure DMCA has no
ground - their statement certainly seems to be a lie based on the fact that
the code is not for the Casio, then again they probably also have no legal
grounds against people using their own plastic casio calculator cases for
something that's not a casio circuit... so this is quite possibly a willful
abuse of DMCA processes on Github to get it illegally removed.

[EDIT]

On closer inspection it should be possible to invalidate the complaint on the
spot... the full complaint is included in the article, including a link to the
supposed "original copyrighted work":

[https://support.casio.com/en/support/download.php?cid=004&pi...](https://support.casio.com/en/support/download.php?cid=004&pid=729)

It contains some generic example formulas in a simple looking expression
language which I expect runs on their calculators. Not exactly something you
could set up a http connection with, and definitely not a "literal copy" of
the arduino code in the other repo.

~~~
will_raw
"... to their exam-apporved calculator case" is a very good point, this
calculator is basically used by every engineering student in their exam. And
it clear that they feared that their sales might get hurt.

~~~
sosborn
The first thing I thought when I saw that is that they are scared this will
affect their certification. That fear, I think, is understandable even if the
response is too heavy handed.

------
elliekelly
> Neutrino informs us that he has already filed a DMCA counternotice with
> Github to get his project back.

I’m increasingly uncomfortable with the balance of knowledge/power/experience
in the counter-notice process. The repo owner is at a huge disadvantage when
going up against the experienced and expensive lawyers filing these claims.
Even when the law is on the developer’s side it’s almost an unwinnable battle.

~~~
ikeboy
In this case, Casio is unlikely to file a frivolous lawsuit, so the content
will go back up.

The only disadvantage is if the rights owner is willing to file a frivolous
lawsuit, and in that scenario their lawyers can get sanctioned by the court.

Look at e.g. Richard Leibowitz for an aggressive copyright attorney who's been
sanctioned by various courts.

~~~
loeg
Responding only to this part:

> The only disadvantage is if the rights owner is willing to file a frivolous
> lawsuit, and _in that scenario their lawyers can get sanctioned by the
> court_.

It's difficult in many jurisdictions for a defendant to actually get even
their lawyers' fees covered by a frivolous litigant, much less sanctions for
the litigant and/or their lawyers. Especially if, as the initiating party,
they pick a friendly jurisdiction without anti-SLAPP laws.

~~~
ikeboy
I'm not quite sure about that framing. Every jurisdiction reserves the right
to sanction attorneys for frivolous cases.

The framing I'd prefer is that there are meritless cases that don't quite rise
to the level of frivolous; the legal terminology here is "a good faith
extension of existing law." I think the legal system properly doesn't penalize
such cases. If a case isn't sanctionable, we need to accept the consequences
as a trade-off for allowing everyone access to the courts.

That being said, I support stronger anti-slapp laws - and I say this as
someone who's faced a meritless and possibly frivolous anti-SLAPP motion
myself (discussed in other recent HN threads). Personally, the anti-slapp laws
have only hurt me, and I still support their expansion.

~~~
loeg
They reserve the right to sanction, but it _rarely_ happens, even for repeated
infringers.

And I disagree with your framing. There are plenty of truly frivolous cases
brought to harass or compel poorer entities, and it mostly works (maybe less
well against speech in jurisdictions with anti-SLAPP).

~~~
ikeboy
I feel uncomfortable with an alternative world where it's significantly easier
to sanction attorneys. I suspect many legitimate cases would not end up being
brought, and legal costs would go up. There's a trade-off to be made.

------
jventura
I,ve seen the video at the bottom and the guy uses at most the calculator
plastic case to house a oled display and a ESP. How can Casio (or someone on
their behalf) find any plausible argument to file any complaint at all?

I guess if people had to pay at least one dollar to file a complaint like
this, you’d have less.

Also, why did github removed the repo before checking things out first?

~~~
loeg
> Also, why did github removed the repo before checking things out first?

This is how they absolve themselves of liability for user content under the
DMCA.

~~~
jventura
Guilty until proven innocent...

~~~
Silhouette
That's what counter-notices are for. It's more like guilty until you say "No,
I'm not".

------
pbasista
From what I was able to see on YouTube and read in the repository's clone, the
author of the original repository did not use the calculator's electronics or
software at all. They only slightly modified its hardware by removing the
solar panel and then installed some completely independent electronics in
there.

Yet, REACT (also known as the Anti-Counterfeiting Network), which represents
Casio, claims that:

> The code the repository contains is proprietary and not to be publicly
> published. The hosted content is a direct, literal copy of our client’s
> work.

I would be interested to know which of their products uses WiFi and connects
to a Firebase database.

------
supernova87a
I don't know about you, but I observe that when a company's legal filings
outweigh its product innovations, its management is sleepwalking on autopilot,
being caretaken by lawyers, and is soon to be fed to the private equity
wolves.

------
skdd8
What in the actual fuck! I laughed so hard at this video just to watch in
disgust how the DCMA and it's lackey GH would take down a repo that has
nothing to do with Casio other than the name perhaps. Where is the freedom to
tinker? If I modify my Toyota Corolla to take a Ferrari engine would Ferrari
or Toyota come to my house and take my car away?

Fight for your right to repair:

[https://www.eff.org/issues/right-to-repair](https://www.eff.org/issues/right-
to-repair)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npd_xDuNi9k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Npd_xDuNi9k)

~~~
userbinator
The right to repair (and mod) has been a part of contemporary car culture for
around a century (at least in the US), and it's also why there is a huge
aftermarket for it. If anything, I think Tesla is currently the only automaker
who would disapprove.

------
MintelIE
All the modern calculator companies are hostile to their user base. Their
actual customers are the textbook companies, standardized test firms, and
school districts, it seems.

There is an exception, the SwissMicros people[1]. But that seems to be about
it in this modern era. HP used to be excellent as their main market was
engineers and scientists and other professionals. But the Prime is obviously
made for the school calculator market.

It seems that large companies have decided the school market is the only one
which matters now, and compliance with standardized testing rules is more
important than other considerations. That's probably why used HP calculators
from the golden age cost as much or more than a new TI, Casio, or Prime.

[1] [https://www.swissmicros.com/](https://www.swissmicros.com/)

------
bubblethink
The easy solution to all these source-code DMCA problems seems to be self-host
your git repo in a sensible country. Why don't projects do that to begin with
? Every week some github drama makes it to the front page. github is not the
same as git. If enough people host it elsewhere, maybe somebody in the US will
wake up. There isn't any other solution to it.

------
dukoid
What are the penalties for wrong DMCA complaints?

~~~
ikeboy
It's very difficult to establish the bad faith required to win a 512(f)
misrepresentation case, but it's doable and you can win damages.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
In the UK you could sue for libel, because this suit potentially defames the
public character of the accused and could cause both personal and professional
losses.

It would put the burden of proof on Casio, requiring convincing proof that the
claims in the lawsuit are true and neither vexatious nor frivolous.

That would be interesting to watch, because I get the impression Casio's legal
team have no idea what they're doing. They're really trying to protect Casio's
status in exams, but _to do that_ they're talking about source code and using
the DMCA as a legal gambit.

I doubt they're really interested in whether source code was used or even what
source code is. Someone on the team thought "OK - sounds good - we can make
that stick" and here we are.

If it's really not true - which sounds likely, from the comments - it's sloppy
and lazy work and leaves any number of open goals for countersuits.

~~~
ikeboy
In the US you only can't sue for libel because DMCA preempts all federal and
state causes of action - instead you sue for misrepresentation under 512(f).

But for false claims of infringement that don't involve copyright, a libel
claim can work. I've previously mentioned my own 8 figure lawsuit against tp-
link for false claims of counterfeiting; I have antitrust, tortious
interference, declaratory judgement, and defamation (i.e. libel) causes of
action. I know of at least one similar case with a multi-million dollar jury
award from 1999 (see Alexander binzel v nu-tecsys.)

------
anotheryou
Have they even watched the vid?

He doesn't touch the computing part of the computer, he just fits a micro
controller with screen, battery and wifi in the case and removes the solar
panel and a bit of plastic for that.

Sadly that makes the whole project a bit less exciting, but still :)

------
JayOC84
I think this is to keep the calculators in schools. Teachers may start
freaking out if they think students could cheat using this hack.

~~~
bfung
If a student could go through all the soldering and programming involved, they
should automatically pass some freshman college engineering course.

Casio missed out on a new market for tinkers...

------
dylan604
"This week REACT wrote to Github, "<snip> "CASIO may somehow feel it’s in the
right here but it does seem just a little bit petty."

More likely REACT reacted on their own as that's what their entire existence
is about. This was probably yet again some lawyer working for the group that
has no knowledge of coding, see's the trade name of a company they are
representing, and took action.

Of course, I'm just playing armchair QB and have no knowledge whatsoever
either way. He said, EvilCorp said, He loses.

------
teh_klev
The twitter account @CasioMaths seems to the be last remaining active Casio
calculator twitter account (appears to be UK based) I can find. I've already
tweeted them to point out the error of their ways. Perhaps others could follow
suit, but obviously in a polite and civilised manner, let's not have an
abusive pile-on.

------
daniel-thompson
It's shitty behavior, for sure, but it's rational given what I assume to be
their incentive: to stay in the good graces of the people who set calculator
policy for standardized tests. The College Board has an explicit whitelist and
general guidelines here:
[https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/taking-the-
tes...](https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/taking-the-
test/calculator-policy)

> You are not allowed to use any of the following items as a calculator: ...
> Models that can access the Internet, have wireless, Bluetooth, cellular,
> audio/video recording and playing, camera, or any other smart phone type
> feature

~~~
jetrink
> It's shitty behavior, for sure, but it's rational

Can we just reflect on that though? The College Board states on their website
that, "We value critical thinkers who assess the accuracy and relevancy of
data and use it to support ideas and solve problems; who communicate clearly
and concisely; and who make it a point to master the technologies relevant to
their work." Their job is helping to identify which students possess the
knowledge and reasoning skills to succeed in higher education. And yet, it is
rational to assume that the College Board itself will not use critical
thinking nor a mastery of calculator technology in this case. Instead, they
will respond bureaucratically, banning a model of calculator, because a
hobbyist hollowed one out and stuffed some electronics inside. When did the
absurd become the rational?

~~~
daniel-thompson
To be clear, I was saying Casio's behavior is rational, not the College
Board's.

------
nomadluap
Does anyone have a clone of the original repository?

~~~
bhickey
Here's a fork [https://github.com/rida1148/Hack-Casio-
Calculator](https://github.com/rida1148/Hack-Casio-Calculator)

~~~
_sbrk
Don't you just love the Streissand effect? :-)

------
Aeolun
Somewhere, someone in Casio is so done with life that they figured that this
was a reasonable way to spend their time and company money...

~~~
apricot
Pretty sure this was done at the behest of someone who was afraid that
calculator could lose its exam certification, something which is a Big Deal
for them.

------
garfieldnate
One product I absolutely loved from Casio was their Japanese electronic
dictionaries. At some point they replaced their black and wide LCD screens
with backlit full-color LCD screens and the hardware became much slower. I've
been looking for resources on reverse engineering or jailbreaking the late
2000's models, but haven't been able to find much.

------
goatinaboat
_freedom-to-tinker’ proponents throwing their hands up in despair wondering
why big corporations have nothing better to do._

This is not about Casio really, this is about React who need to justify their
existence to their sponsors. Casio probably wasn’t even aware this was
happening at first.

------
miga
It is concerning that big companies have such undue influence on industry and
engineering of an individual who legally bought a product, and was not in any
way stealing it.

------
rasz
Wasnt aware Casio was running their calculators using ESP8266. That would be
the only plausible reason for copyright claim ...

------
agumonkey
Quite sad, company providing calc tools to learn .. most probably aiming at
future tech heads.. bashes on guy who does tech.

------
29athrowaway
I think in this case, the calculator circuitry remains the same. The only
thing modified was the case.

------
djmips
His big mistake was using the words "Hack Casio" in the name of his project.
heheh.

------
foobar_
Intellectual property is anti-competitive and monopolistic which is anti
capitalistic. It started out as a reward system for authors and inventors.
What we now have is an obscenity becauase we are rewarding corporations that
neither produce nor invent anything. The legal loophole that a corporation is
a person is false. Adam Smith did not have that in mind when he was extolling
the virtues of capitalism. We need to force liability based capitalism without
personhood and breakup all conglomerates.

~~~
kube-system
People who have rights individually should still have those rights when they
assemble.

The practical consequences of removing personhood would be disastrous for the
rights of individuals who work at a corporation and the rights of individuals
who want to contract with a corporation.

If you think it’s hard to sue a bad corporation now, just think about how hard
it would be if you had to individually name each of the owners in a suit.

~~~
foobar_
Find an email thread that links them ?

For people thinking you need limited liability to be a big company ... you
don't. Bloomberg is not an LLP as far as I know.

~~~
kube-system
Don’t think that thread exists for any public companies, most email servers
can’t handle that many recipients.

Bloomberg is an LP which must have at least one partner with limited
liability.

------
metaphor
WT actual F??

From GitHub's policy on submitting a DMCA takedown notice[1] on what the
complaint must contain:

> _(7) Include the following statement: "I have a good faith belief that use
> of the copyrighted materials described above on the infringing web pages is
> not authorized by the copyright owner, or its agent, or the law. I have
> taken fair use into consideration."_

> _(8) Also include the following statement: "I swear, under penalty of
> perjury, that the information in this notification is accurate and that I am
> the copyright owner, or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of an
> exclusive right that is allegedly infringed."_

The claimed " _original content_ " (preloaded programs for a fx-FD10 Pro)
cited in the takedown notice[2] isn't even remotely relevant to the physical
host that the hack targets (a fx-991MS). After watching the 11 min video and
without even looking at the repo contents, it's so obvious that REACT couldn't
possibly have submitted this DMCA takedown notice " _in good faith_ " given
the standalone hack has _absolutely nothing_ to do with the target host's
firmware/software--or anything published on Casio's website--to begin with!

So " _under penalty of perjury_ ", React is exploiting how GitHub passively
handles these DMCA takedown notices...I mean seriously, an irrelevant download
link that clearly wasn't reviewed by anything that constitutes human
intelligence can nerf an entire repo?? Unfortunately, this has been the meta
for as long as I can remember and this pragmatically non-existent qualifying
bar is just 1 reason why I don't play on GitHub.

But the part I find to be the most egregious that it appears no one is really
talking about? To defend himself, this guy has to satisfy GitHub's counter
notice policy[3], in particular:

> _(3) Provide your contact information. Include your email address, name,
> telephone number, and physical address._

The policy doesn't even require explaining to GitHub why the takedown is
bullshit; it's just to signal the other side that you're willing to defend the
thing under scrutiny against further legal action. The guy already pulled the
counter notice trigger, but without dedicated legal representation and/or the
public media on your side, it's difficult for any 1 dood in the capacity of
private citizen to expose personal identifiable information and embrace the
threat of a legal harassment campaign by an organization of legal
professionals. React knows they don't have anything, but if the victim doesn't
have balls + legal counsel + disposable income, the gambit is that they really
won't need anything either.

[1] [https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-
submi...](https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-
dmca-takedown-notice#your-complaint-must-)

[2]
[https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-2...](https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2020/05/2020-05-20-Casio.md)

[3] [https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-
submi...](https://help.github.com/en/github/site-policy/guide-to-submitting-a-
dmca-counter-notice#your-counter-notice-must)

