Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades
Different case, yes.
|
And it's pointless to argue about a case
no one has filed, and that no one is likely to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades
That doesn't matter though because it would still have to go through the court system and be proven to not be a DeDRM software.
|
Or shown to be one the exceptions specifically allowed in Title 17, as has been explained multiple times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shades
That would probably cost thousands of dollars in fees to prove something that never needed to go to court in the first place. Aka a waste of time and money. Are you advocating that courts should listen to frivolous lawsuits that waste everyone's time?
|
When the law is ambiguous, as it is in this case, the way it gets less ambiguous is by going to court and getting case law established. In this case, the ambiguity is harmful. Whether it is harmful to the content industry (as would be the case if stripping DRM for file format conversion is prohibited), or harmful to the consumer (if it's not), it should be clarified.
So, I utterly reject your premise that it is a frivolous lawsuit and that it doesn't need to go to court. It does need to go to court, and be clarified, and the sooner the better. Yes, it will be expensive. So? Are you advocating a legal system in which only the rich can have justice?