Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
Except, of course, it's not. I cited the relevant section of Title 17, which has several exemptions.
|
And I linked a section from Wikipedia indicating that those exemptions tend to be honored more in the breach. Since I guess you didn't read it, I'll go ahead and quote it here (emphasis mine):
Quote:
|
However, in a number of cases involving DVD decryption courts have held that there is no fair use defense in circumvention cases. In Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294, 322 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), the court stated that "(i)f Congress had meant the fair use defense to apply to such actions, it would have said so."
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by taustin
I expect the reason nobody has included an anti-circumvention claim is that their lawyers tell them not to, because they wouldn't likely win. There being exemptions for interoperability, and all.
|
If those exemptions were all that effective, we wouldn't have
dozens of petitions every three years from people saying, "Allow us to break DRM for fair use purposes under the law, please."