Quote:
Originally Posted by pdurrant
I'm not quite sure what you meant to say here. In context of the thread, it seems that you're trying to say "I wasn't implying that circumventing DRM was approved by post-DMCA courts."
You may not have meant to imply that, but it is what you said:
If, however, you mean "I wasn't implying that circumventing DRM devices were approved by post-DMCA courts." I agree, but I don't think that was the issue under discussion.
To remove any confusion, my position is this:
As far as I know, no US court has ruled on whether removing DRM from digital media that you own is legal, except in the specific instances set out by the library of Congresss.
There are differing legal opinions on whether the DMCA makes all such circumvention illegal in the US.
|
I think you're confusing my points. There are two things being discussed - the legality of DRM breakers and creating personal backups. The Quaid case I referenced might be old, but it is important because it considered creating a private backup fair use and not copyright infringement. DMCA is about making DRM breakers available and not about
using a DRM breaker. Plus the DRM breaker is prohibited when it infringes upon a creator's copyright and I don't know that private backups have ever been reclassified as copyright infringement.