Quote:
Originally Posted by auspex
No. The copyright issues and DRM-removal are separate issues. It's illegal under the DMCA to tell someone how to remove DRM. What this judge effectively said is that telling someone how to remove DRM is NOT contributory infringement, and that they'll have to use the DMCA if they want to stop it. Whether they would go that route seems doubtful. A law that's on the books but untested is much more useful to the publishing houses than one that's been tossed by the courts.
As for the argument that DMCA doesn't permit exceptions to the regulation against DRM removal, I tend to agree with taustin: yes, the courts may have argued that there's no "fair use provision", but there IS a provision—it is not a matter of "fair use".
|
Exactly this. What the publishers, MPAA, RIAA, etc. don't want is a precedent set that makes the DMCA look less scary and ultimately give the consumer more rights to what these organizations perceive as their property, the book, movie or music that you paid money for.