[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by drjenkins

Yes, that is why I said "it should not be illegal" because in reality it is illegal. That is what the bill intends to correct.

Here's a pertinent article for ebook DRM:

U.S. Copyright Office Publishes Final Rules With DMCA Exemptions/

This is a good thing because it means we can strip the DRM because the DRM gets in the way of accessibility and we don't have to have just one version accessible to not be able to strip the DRM.

Update: One reader pointed out that I should have read more carefully. The exceptions for disabled readers is actually broader than before. A couple restrictive clauses were removed. For example, the exception used to state that all versions of a title must have the accessibility features disabled. Now someone can strip the DRM of a legally purchased Nook ebook just because that is the one they own. It doesn't matter if the other formats are accessible.

But, there is still Fair Use and it's quite possible that if a case of DRM removal goes in front of a Judge, it will be ruled in favor of DRM stripping. There is a precedence in place to rule in favor of DRM removal. When the eBook Locked In by John Scalzi was released, it wasn't properly released without DRM at all stores. Both Scalzi and Tor (the publisher) said it was allowed to remove the DRM. Scalzi even posted a link to where to get the DRM removal tools on his blog. So in this case, both the author and publisher said it was allowable to remove the DRM and linked to the tools. The rights holders of Locked In said go and remove the DRM. So that then gives the tools legitimacy.