liberty vs security
Security was one of the most controversial aspects of the Mega Drive – here’s how one third party broke through it
One of the interesting things about the Mega Drive is its security system. Mega Drive consoles featuring the Trademark Security System (TMSS) expect to read the word ‘Sega’ at a specific ROM address, and the word also must be written to a designated RAM address before the VDP can be accessed. if these conditions are met, the system will display a message stating that the game was “Produced by or under license from Sega enterprises ltd” originally,
this was intended as a region locking measure – developer manuals referred to it as the “US security code” and early Japanese games were not designed to pass the check. This didn’t matter to begin with, as early consoles didn’t implement the check.
however, third parties wanted to develop for the Mega Drive without agreeing to the costly official licensing terms. electronic Arts was one of those, and had reverse-engineered the console
– with Trip hawkins confident that ea would win if Sega tried to sue. “i had great lawyers and took the law very seriously. We understood how to correctly manage a clean room to avoid copyright infringement,” he explains. “We waited patiently to confirm that the genesis that debuted in the US in 1989 and as the Mega Drive in europe in 1990 did not make any changes to the Japanese version that we had figured out. By comparison, while we also reverse-engineered the NES, we did not release any games based on this work because we could not find a way around the patented NES security chip.”
Ultimately, this wasn’t a fight that ea had, as its reverse-engineering earned the company a preferential licensing deal. however, Accolade took the unlicensed route when it released Ishido: The Way Of Stones and incurred Sega’s wrath. “i was not surprised by Accolade’s approach but
when i went to visit them and compare notes i
learned that they lacked legal sophistication,” Trip remembers. “i gave them some advice and offered to collaborate but they went their own way.” Sega implemented the TMSS check in newly manufactured Mega Drives, and Accolade
coded its next releases to pass the check.
Sega launched a series of legal actions in response, alleging unfair competition, copyright infringement for using the TMSS code, and trademark infringement because Accolade’s games triggered a message stating that they were licensed by Sega. Accolade filed a counterclaim, alleging that Sega’s TMSS screen falsified the source of its games. Judge Barbara A Caulfield initially ruled in favour of Sega, dismissing Accolade’s argument of fair use due as its games were made for profit and competed in the marketplace with Sega’s games. however, the decision was appealed. Judge Stephen Reinhardt overturned the earlier verdict, noting that non-expressive functional principles are not protected under US copyright law and that the TMSS code was required for a game to function. Any trademark infringement was considered to be inadvertently triggered by this fair use act, and that Sega was at fault for designing a system that would falsely label the product.
Sega was dissatisfied with the outcome and petitioned for a rehearing, but ultimately the two sides settled under undisclosed terms in April 1993, bringing a year and a half of legal wrangling to an end. Accolade became a licensed Mega Drive developer, TMSS remained in Mega Drive systems, and a more specific method of region locking was ultimately implemented.