Quote:
Originally Posted by murraypaul
What it does is add an alternative in situations where people cannot, or do not wish to, remove DRM.
|
Hmm. I think that's wishful thinking.
I gave the wrong link earlier. Here's the government's full response document:
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/response-2011-copyright-final.pdf
In the section on DRM (p20) (my highlights):
Quote:
|
Rights holders use these measures to prevent or deter copyright infringement. The supply and use of equipment to circumvent technological measures is therefore illegal in UK and European law in recognition of the damage it can cause. However, the use of TPM sometimes prevents activities that are permitted acts such as making an accessible copy for the visually impaired. For the majority of permitted acts, either the UK must provide for a means of access to TPM-protected content for the purpose of such acts, or the UK may not do so. Of the permitted acts considered in this document, private copying is the exception: the UK has a choice as to whether to provide a means of access.
|
It then goes on to describe the means of access as I described above, i.e. by petition to the Secretary of State, noting:
Quote:
|
It is important to note that the SoS cannot simply authorise a user to circumvent TPMs; it would not be lawful under the Copyright Directive.
|
I read that as a pretty clear indication that circumventing TPMs (e.g. DRM) would be considered illegal.
Just to reinforce it, lower down, the document states:
Quote:
|
Many respondents to the consultation expressed concern at the possibility of their work being easier to copy unlawfully if TPM could be overridden or removed. As stated above, users will not be allowed to override or remove TPM.
|
And as I noted, the response could be to buy another copy in the right format:
Quote:
|
Possible outcomes of a SoS intervention would include a direction to the user to purchase an existing digital copy that was usable for the purpose required, or that a rights holder provide the user with a particular excerpt from a work.
|
The only quibble I can see is whether software tools count as 'equipment'.
Graham