Quote:
Originally Posted by user_none
There are two sets of laws here (at least in the USA). Copyright and the DMCA (an extension to copyright that primarily deals with digital works). The DMCA gives additional legal avenues to people who use DRM. Anti-DRM circumvention is part of the DMCA. So if you use DRM you can sue for violation of copyright and for circumventing the DRM protecting the work. However many parts of the DMCA do not require the use of DRM to be used by a rights holder (take down notice for instance).
|
So using DRM would effectively mean that you could sue or prosecute for copyright infringement
and circumventing the DRM. That fits with what I thought.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
True, but that's trademark law, not copyright law ("Aspirin" is probably the best-known example of a company losing its trademark in that way). Copyright law just doesn't work like that. A work is copyrighted, even if it doesn't contain a copyright notice, and nobody can claim that they didn't know that it was.
|
That's pretty much what my understanding was.