Quote:
Originally Posted by thrawn_aj
No takers? Great. I guess that was accurate and no such exemption exists. Hopefully, we won't have that incorrect argument (about book-scanning being the legal alternative to breaking DRM) brought up again and again in the future. Cheers 
(If someone suddenly remembers something, please be sure to read the entire argument and not just the snippet above before posting a "rebuttal"). |
See my earlier post
here. You can find even earlier posts of mine that cover the issue in greater detail. My layman's understanding is that the DMCA's preamble claims that it should not be construed to diminish any existing fair-use rights, while its body makes DRM-removal illegal. The apparent contradiction requires the courts to sort it out.
I have written advice-of-counsel (from an eminent IP lawyer, no less!) to the effect that, in her opinion, removal of DRM from legally acquired content
for personal use only falls entirely within existing fair-use rights. This, and a couple of bucks, may buy me a cup of coffee. (Really, it establishes that I sought advice and intended to remain legal. But no more than that.)
As always, IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer), so do not place reliance on this opinion.
Xenophon