Quote:
Originally Posted by pdurrant
You're neglecting 1201(a)(1)(B): "The prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to persons who are users of a copyrighted work which is in a particular class of works, if such persons are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make noninfringing uses of that particular class of works under this title, as determined under subparagraph (C)."
and also
1201(c)(1): Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title.
Until there's a case that actually addresses the issue directly, I think the law is unclear. In the US, anyway.
|
You're ignoring the underlined words above. The applicability of the exemption is determined through a periodic rulemaking by the Librarian of Congress and is not unclear; you may recall that the Librarian of Congress previously granted exemptions for "jailbreaking" a phone.
1201(c)(1) is somewhat tricky as it's not immediately clear whether or not it allows circumvention in cases that involve fair use. However, in the case of Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes (111 F. Supp. 2d 294, 322 (S.D.N.Y. 2000)) the court found that fair use does not apply in cases of circumvention of DRM (that case involved decrypting DVDs). The RealNetworks cases is also a good one, and should be easy to find if you have an interest in the subject.
The DMCA isn't new, there have been a number of cases on it, and on the anti-circumvention section specifically. What issues do you see that still need to be ruled on? Don't take the last sentence as a rhetorical question, I genuinely would like your thoughts on that.
Just as an interesting aside, Canada will likely implement new copyright legislation shortly that includes a a highly controversial section DRM-breaking.