Register Guidelines E-Books Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   MobileRead Forums > E-Book General > General Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-05-2010, 11:48 PM   #1
sweevo
Groupie
sweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animalssweevo is kind to children and small, furry animals
 
sweevo's Avatar
 
Posts: 197
Karma: 6848
Join Date: Aug 2010
Device: Sony PRS-650, Kindle Touch
Does this court ruling mean removing ebook DRM for reading on other devices is legal?

"Here's some remarkable news: a judge in a New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Appeals Court has ruled that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's ban on breaking DRM only applies if you break DRM in order to violate copyright law. This is a complete reversal of earlier rulings across the country (and completely opposite to the approach that the US Trade Representative has demanded from America's trading partners). In the traditional view, DRM is absolutely protected, so that no one is allowed to break it except the DRM maker. In other words, a film-maker isn't allowed to take the BluRay DRM off her own movie, a video game programmer can't take the iPad DRM off her own game, and an audiobook author can't take the DRM off his own Audible book.
So this ruling is pretty interesting news, as it constitutes a circuit split with pretty much the rest of the nation's courts, which is often a precursor to a Supreme Court challenge. What's more, the defendants here are General Electric, not hackers in black t-shirts or sketchy offshore Xbox-modchip vendors (theoretically the law shouldn't care if the defendant is a hobo or a billionaire, but in practice, billionaires usually get better precedents, and not just because they can afford better lawyers).

It's up to the plaintiff, MGE, to appeal to the Supremes, but even if they don't, it's only a matter of time until there are new cases in the Fifth Circuit (or other circuits that follow its lead) that lead to highest court handing down some new law on this. Let's hope they see the sense of Judge Garza: "Merely bypassing a technological protection that restricts a user from viewing or using a work is insufficient to trigger the (Digital Millennium Copyright Act's) anti-circumvention provision."

Source: http://www.boingboing.net/2010/07/25...ge-says-y.html

Original article: http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/07/23/29099.htm
sweevo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 12:36 AM   #2
delphidb96
Wizard
delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 3,000
Karma: 300001
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Citrus Heights, California
Device: TWO Kindle 2s, one each Bookeen Cybook Gen3, Sony PRS-500, Axim X51V
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweevo View Post
"Here's some remarkable news: a judge in a New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Appeals Court has ruled that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's ban on breaking DRM only applies if you break DRM in order to violate copyright law. This is a complete reversal of earlier rulings across the country (and completely opposite to the approach that the US Trade Representative has demanded from America's trading partners). In the traditional view, DRM is absolutely protected, so that no one is allowed to break it except the DRM maker. In other words, a film-maker isn't allowed to take the BluRay DRM off her own movie, a video game programmer can't take the iPad DRM off her own game, and an audiobook author can't take the DRM off his own Audible book.
So this ruling is pretty interesting news, as it constitutes a circuit split with pretty much the rest of the nation's courts, which is often a precursor to a Supreme Court challenge. What's more, the defendants here are General Electric, not hackers in black t-shirts or sketchy offshore Xbox-modchip vendors (theoretically the law shouldn't care if the defendant is a hobo or a billionaire, but in practice, billionaires usually get better precedents, and not just because they can afford better lawyers).

It's up to the plaintiff, MGE, to appeal to the Supremes, but even if they don't, it's only a matter of time until there are new cases in the Fifth Circuit (or other circuits that follow its lead) that lead to highest court handing down some new law on this. Let's hope they see the sense of Judge Garza: "Merely bypassing a technological protection that restricts a user from viewing or using a work is insufficient to trigger the (Digital Millennium Copyright Act's) anti-circumvention provision."

Source: http://www.boingboing.net/2010/07/25...ge-says-y.html

Original article: http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/07/23/29099.htm
No. It just means that one court thinks so. And we all know how contentious the court system can be.

Derek
delphidb96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 11:50 AM   #3
Shaggy
Wizard
Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Shaggy ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Shaggy's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,293
Karma: 529619
Join Date: May 2007
Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweevo View Post
"Here's some remarkable news: a judge in a New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Appeals Court has ruled that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's ban on breaking DRM only applies if you break DRM in order to violate copyright law.
I'm not sure that's what the judge was really saying.

It sounded like in this case, the "protection" was not protecting against copyright infringement at all, so the judge said the DMCA didn't apply. That's different from saying that breaking DRM is OK for fair use, etc.
Shaggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 12:27 PM   #4
GeoffC
Chocolate Grasshopper ...
GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.GeoffC ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
GeoffC's Avatar
 
Posts: 26,947
Karma: 17036296
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Scotland
Device: Cybook Gen3 , Pocketbook 302 (Black) , Nexus 10: wife has PW
Quote:
Originally Posted by delphidb96 View Post
No. It just means that one court thinks so. And we all know how contentious the court system can be.

Derek

It, also, only applies to one court in the USA - not the World !
GeoffC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 02:13 PM   #5
delphidb96
Wizard
delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.delphidb96 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 3,000
Karma: 300001
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Citrus Heights, California
Device: TWO Kindle 2s, one each Bookeen Cybook Gen3, Sony PRS-500, Axim X51V
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffC View Post
It, also, only applies to one court in the USA - not the World !
EGGGGG-ZACTLY!!!



Derek
delphidb96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2010, 02:20 PM   #6
shall1028
Zealot
shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.shall1028 puts his or her pants on both legs at a time.
 
shall1028's Avatar
 
Posts: 148
Karma: 133978
Join Date: Jun 2010
Device: Kobo
See:

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92083

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92234

http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92188

for previous discussion of this topic.
shall1028 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where is the stripping of DRM legal? duckbill News 38 09-02-2011 01:27 PM
Librarian of Congress says ebook DRM circumvision legal? Nathanael General Discussions 15 08-11-2010 08:34 PM
Textbook Publishers Win Court Ruling Against RapidShare Steven Lyle Jordan News 7 02-24-2010 06:19 PM
Question about the Sony ebook store, DRM, multiple devices *Angie* Sony Reader 6 10-13-2009 11:41 AM
"Are eBook Reading Devices Doomed?" mizo9999 News 60 12-23-2008 08:20 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:55 PM.


MobileRead.com is a privately owned, operated and funded community.