Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
It's certainly implied in 296ZE, as I indicated above.
|
I don't think so.
It gives a new alternative that does not already exist.
I don't see anywhere where it criminalises anything which is not already so.
Quote:
|
In other words, if DRM prevents you performing the permitted act (in this case copying) you are not allowed to circumvent the DRM. Instead you must complain to the Secretary of State who will decide on the remedial action required.
|
It says that you
may complain.
It doesn't say that this removes any existing options you already have.
What it does is add an alternative in situations where people cannot, or do not wish to, remove DRM.