Quote:
Originally Posted by anamardoll
You, personally, may not but a good many people do. Since there is not a set-in-stone definition of "piracy", that makes these conversations complicated.
|
Fair point. I guess I see piracy of intellectual property as that which actually infringes on the owners rights to exploit the work (eg: making it available to others for free when the owner wants the right to sell it), as opposed to breaking the technicalities that surround copyright - which is how I see the complicated stuff relating to DRM etc, and is obviously a personal opinion and certainly not a legal one.
If real pirates had floated around doing illegal things only to each other and only on their own ship, and never infringing on the rights of other people and ships, then I doubt the name would mean much to us now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Nemo
If a manufacturer or copyright owner puts in place a device to stop or inhibit the reproduction of a digital media and you remove that device for personal use or gain, then it is deemed as piracy under European law. The law in the States is even more specific.
This fact that the stupid bloody thing shouldn't be there in the first place is irrelevant.
|
Potentially illegal, yes, but "deemed as piracy"? - I've not seen such a definition. That nit-pick aside, according to this
Wikipedia article: "Under DMCA, a potential user who wants to avail herself of an alleged fair use privilege to crack copy protection (which is not prohibited) would have to do it herself since no equipment would lawfully be marketed for that purpose. Under InfoSoc Directive, this possibility would not be available since circumvention of copy protection is illegal." (Though I would also note that the DMCA remains a moving target, with its exemptions changing every three years.)