07-25-2010, 08:14 PM | #1 | |
Fanatic
Posts: 514
Karma: 2954711
Join Date: May 2006
|
Appeals court case could legalize breaking DRM for ‘fair use’
At TeleRead, I report on a 5th circuit appeals court case that literally has the potential to redefine the way the DMCA is interpreted, assuming a higher court doesn't reverse it. A quote from the decision, bold emphasis mine:
Quote:
Fingers crossed that the decision stands! Last edited by Robotech_Master; 07-25-2010 at 08:43 PM. |
|
07-25-2010, 08:40 PM | #2 |
Guru
Posts: 985
Karma: 4567263
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The End Of The Earth
Device: Several
|
Oh, AMEN to that!
|
Advert | |
|
07-25-2010, 08:50 PM | #3 |
Wizard
Posts: 2,895
Karma: 6995721
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Idaho, on the side of a mountain
Device: Kindle Oasis, Fire 3d Gen and 5th Gen and Samsung Tab S
|
I'm not a copyright lawyer, but it doesn't appear that is what the case says. A code was required to run certain software. Like the code required to activate the radio in an old BMW after the battery failed. It was not in place to protect something given protection by the DMCA. But the DMCA specifically prohibits "decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner.” Id. § 1201(a)(3)(A). While the use of a PID to read a book you have purchased would be similar, removing protection altogether is not.
According to this case, I could keep a copy of my PID so that I could read my book on another reader that could read mobi books, but I could not alter the book so that I could read it in a different format. I continue to believe that it is unlikely that any case will be brought against someone who removes encryption on books they bought, so long as they do not pass those books on or otherwise violate the copyright. The problem is there are no damages suffered by the copyright holder. The person who provides the software, however, could be prosecuted under the DMCA for providing the decryption software. Last edited by Sydney's Mom; 07-25-2010 at 08:59 PM. |
07-25-2010, 08:52 PM | #4 |
Fanatic
Posts: 514
Karma: 2954711
Join Date: May 2006
|
Syndney's Mom, the section of the opinion I quoted seems pretty clear on what the DMCA is supposed to allow, per this judge: it is supposed to allow fair use. Just breaking the DRM isn't supposed to trigger the anti-circumvention restriction.
|
07-25-2010, 10:34 PM | #5 |
Wizard
Posts: 1,196
Karma: 1281258
Join Date: Sep 2009
Device: PRS-505
|
It's certainly an interesting case. But having read the judgement I can't help feeling that it will have little impact on the status of most common forms of DRM.
His decision is based on the idea that there's a distinction between accessing a work and the protection against copying afforded by the Copyright Act. It seems a critical element in his decision was that, "there is no encryption or other form of protection on the software itself to prevent copyright violations," and that the dongle was merely involved in a validation check that had to be passed before the software would run. Frankly, I think his reasoning here is both sloppy and naive and he is placing far too much importance on the process of encryption. This form of simple hardware-key validation lock was a common form of software protection in several industries, though I think almost all employ some form of encryption these days merely to make them harder to crack. Encryption is not a magic bullet, and in fact all computer data is encrypted in some form (very few people are capable of reading raw binary code). The critical element lies not in the presence of encryption, but in how the keys needed to decrypt the data are managed. Still it's clear that, to this judge, encryption (such as that used by most forms of DRM) would indeed fall under the measures protected by the DMCA. While I think his argument concerning the technical nature of the circumvention in this case is wrong, the judgement will stand for the simple reason that, as pointed out in the last two paragraphs of page 7, MGE failed to demonstrate that GE did, in fact, crack the software. They merely acquired a cracked version in the course of their purchase of PMI, which the DMCA doesn't prohibit. So, while I hate DRM as much as anyone, sadly I don't think this judgement will help much in restoring the consumer property rights that the DMCA infringes. His remark about fair use is laudable, but the case in question did not involve fair use at all, and it's clearly implied that if the software had been encrypted then the DMCA would have applied. |
Advert | |
|
07-26-2010, 06:08 AM | #6 |
Connoisseur
Posts: 92
Karma: 906
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SouthWest Pensylvania
Device: Kindle 3, iPod Touch, Pre-electronic devices
|
The music business went through this years ago and the publishing business has failed to learn the lessons from that. Their position is hurting them more and turning more and more people away from supporting them.
|
07-26-2010, 10:12 AM | #7 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,355
Karma: 35112572
Join Date: Jan 2008
Device: Pocketbook
|
Quote:
|
|
07-26-2010, 11:03 AM | #8 |
Guru
Posts: 915
Karma: 3537194
Join Date: Feb 2009
Device: Kobo, Kindle 3, Paperwhite
|
Agree! Publishers, and retailers like Amazon and B&N, keep angling for a larger piece of the pie when they should be working on making the whole pie bigger. Getting rid of DRM and making more ebooks available across more dedicated ereading devices would help.
|
07-26-2010, 11:15 AM | #9 |
Chocolate Grasshopper ...
Posts: 27,599
Karma: 20821184
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Scotland
Device: Muse HD , Cybook Gen3 , Pocketbook 302 (Black) , Nexus 10: wife has PW
|
As with other issues with ebooks, this is, of course, a geographical issue !
a US solution for the US .... |
07-26-2010, 11:20 AM | #10 |
Wizard
Posts: 1,196
Karma: 1281258
Join Date: Sep 2009
Device: PRS-505
|
|
07-26-2010, 12:01 PM | #11 |
Banned
Posts: 13,045
Karma: 10105011
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Finally made it to Walmart.
Device: PRS 420
|
*fingers crossed*
|
07-26-2010, 12:04 PM | #12 |
Member
Posts: 23
Karma: 10
Join Date: Oct 2006
Device: Sony Reader, Sony Reader!!
|
It's been made legal by the Library of Congress
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/...n-your-iphone/ Read down to the press release, and bullet number six pertains to us!! |
07-26-2010, 12:24 PM | #13 | |
Wizard
Posts: 1,196
Karma: 1281258
Join Date: Sep 2009
Device: PRS-505
|
Quote:
In the broader terms of fair-use, class 1, which only applies to DVDs using CSS, is probably the most important. |
|
07-26-2010, 01:07 PM | #14 |
Older ... slower ...
Posts: 450
Karma: 1924
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Jurupa Valley CA US
Device: Kobo, Kindles 2/3/Keyboard/Fire/Fire HD, HDX.
|
The "fair use" exemption is not an "excuse" nor "permission" to use 100 per cent of one's works.
|
07-26-2010, 01:26 PM | #15 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 5,185
Karma: 25133758
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3 (Past: Kobo Mini, PEZ, PRS-505, Clié)
|
Does this mean that authors could give readers permission to bypass DRM for their books, regardless of what the publisher has done with them? The author is the copyright *owner*, even if he's sold distribution rights to someone else.
|
Tags |
copyright, dmca, fair use, news |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Does this court ruling mean removing ebook DRM for reading on other devices is legal? | sweevo | General Discussions | 5 | 08-06-2010 02:20 PM |
On the table: DRM trumps fair dealing (Canada) | Wetdogeared | News | 134 | 06-25-2010 10:53 AM |
Apple iPad has "play fair" drm | eBookNerd | Apple Devices | 11 | 02-20-2010 12:42 PM |
Web's inventor appeals to Congress for net neutrality and more lenient DRM | NatCh | News | 1 | 03-03-2007 08:09 AM |
iRex beware: D-Link loses court case due to GPL violations | doctorow | iRex | 13 | 09-27-2006 11:54 AM |