I'm regretting giving my husband a Kindle 3

[HarryT]

No problem.

Section 103 (17 U.S.C Sec. 1201(a)(1)) of the DMCA states:

No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

The Act defines what it means in Section 1201(a)(3):

(3) As used in this subsection—

(A) to 「circumvent a technological measure」 means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and

(B) a technological measure 「effectively controls access to a work」 if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

Thus, if there is some "technological measure that effectively controls access to a work", it is illegal to circumvent that measure.

Is that enough for you?

[kindlekitten]

nope. this is pretty much the "copying for personal use versus copying for distribution". big scary words, but this is not making stripping DRM illegal

aaaand I would like the link to the complete site

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

nope. this is pretty much the "copying for personal use versus copying for distribution". big scary words, but this is not making stripping DRM illegal

I'm sorry to disagree with you, but the wording of the law is clear and unambiguous: to circumvent a technological measure (ie remove DRM) is not permitted. Nowhere does it say "it's OK if it's for personal use".

aaaand I would like the link to the complete site

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...1----000-.html

[Ervserver]

Our local library finally jumped on the ebook bandwagon and I'm loving it. Yes there are wait times for some books, just like paper books. Read something else in the meantime. At least on my Sony returning books early is simple. I'm glad I have a device capable of handling library ebooks even though I don't exclusively do so.

[ApK]

Harry, you have neglected to cite all the exemptions to the anti-circumvention provision, nor did you mention that the 5th circuit federal court has already ruled that
breaking DRM when there is no violation of copyright is not enough to trigger the anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA:

"Merely bypassing a technological protection that restricts a user from viewing or using a work is insufficient to trigger the DMCA's anti-circumvention provision. The DMCA prohibits only forms of access that would violate or impinge on the protections that the Copyright Act otherwise affords copyright owners... The owner's technological measure must protect the copyrighted material against an infringement of a right that the Copyright Act protects, not from mere use or viewing."
-- http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions...21-CV0.wpd.pdf

That pretty clearly and unambiguously says to me that if you strip DRM just to read a book you're entitled to read, that's OK. If you strip DRM to get rights you shouldn't have then that's a violation.
Why are you trying to make people think that you have some first hand knowledge that this is against the law when the courts seem be saying it's not?

ApK

[brbubba]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/custom...deId=200144510
Returning is actually really easy. One great thing about Amazon is their customer service.

[FF2]

Here's another reference:

http://law.onecle.com/uscode/17/index.html

One question might be whether in downloading an epub library book you have implicitly or explicitly agreed to only use the "proper" reader application.

And in googling, I also came up with the 5th Circuit's decision.

It will take the Supremes to decide this ultimately. That is if anyone is willing to chance where they come down. Right now there is a CLUB and some folks might not want to find out it is made of foam. Keeping folks concerned about law breaking may be better than chancing they might not be in the final hour.

[sleepy6553]

Newfie56: I was in your position back in November. I knew I wanted a Kindle because it was the best e-reader. I was unhappy that I would not be able to borrow library books as that is where I get most of my books. I received a private message (on another forum) telling me not to let that deter me from buying the Kindle because there is a workaround. You have been offered the opportunity to PM someone on this forum who will help you if you run into problems. That person was a big help for me. Now I can say that checking out library books is easy.

You have also been provided information to help you determine if this workaround is legally and ethically OK with you. This is something that I think each individual user needs to figure out for themselves. I am of the opinion that it is OK as I am borrowing something that I am allowed to borrow. I don't lend it to anyone else. Others disagree. As I said, this is something only you have to decide.

But know that it can be done. It is not hard, even for a novice like me. I did run into a few snags, but the helpful people on this forum walked me through it and everything is up and running smoothly. I have a long wait on some books at the library, and a very short to no wait on others. I'm very satisfied with the outcome. It might be worth a try before your return period for your husband's Kindle expires. You are not modifying your Kindle at all. All the programs and plug-ins are installed on your computer.

Good luck!

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm sorry to disagree with you, but the wording of the law is clear and unambiguous: to circumvent a technological measure (ie remove DRM) is not permitted. Nowhere does it say "it's OK if it's for personal use".



http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...1----000-.html

like I said, it's the personal use bit

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

That pretty clearly and unambiguously says to me that if you strip DRM just to read a book you're entitled to read, that's OK. If you strip DRM to get rights you shouldn't have then that's a violation.

Precisely. If you strip DRM to get rights you shouldn't have, then that's a violation. And that's exactly what you're doing when you strip library DRM - you're getting rights you shouldn't have: namely, the right to keep the book indefinitely. Whether or not you choose to exercise that right is of no relevance; the important point is that by removing the DRM you have gained a right that the copyright holder did not intend you to have.

Of applicability also is the case of "RealNetworks, Inc. v. DVD Copy Control Association, Inc., 641 F. Supp. 2d 913 (2009)", where RealNetworks were taken to court for selling a tool which allowed users to make backup copies of DVDs. In that case:

The DMCA prohibits circumvention of "effective" access control of copyrighted works and the trafficking of tools that are designed primarily to circumvent "effective" access control or copy control of copyrighted works [7]. RealNetworks alleged that that CSS is not effective anymore because it has been cracked or hacked [8][9]. However, the court ruled that the DMCA statute does not require the access control or copy control technology to be strong as long as it prevents unauthorized access and/or copying under ordinary course of operation and with the authority of the copyright owner. Since the court concluded that CSS is still effective for ordinary uses, the DMCA claim against RealNetworks is valid [1][6].

The court decided that RealDVD is primarily designed or produced to circumvent CSS technology. In particular, the court found that the removal of crucial CSS technology in DVD drive-locking, secure storage of content keys on DVD, CSS authentication and CSS bus encryption during the playback of copied DVD content from the hard dive is a circumvention of CSS, even though they are not needed when playback from the hard drive [6]. The court further explained that even though RealNetworks is a licensee of CSS technology, it does not shield RealNetworks from DMCA claim because the removal of CSS technology is a violation of DMCA [1].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealNet...sociation,_Inc.

This is directly relevant to eBooks, because it says that even though the "fair use" clause of the copyright act makes permissible such activities as format conversion, it is not legal to remove DRM (even when that DRM mechanism has been widely hacked) to permit you to do so.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

like I said, it's the personal use bit

Yes, I know you said that . What I'm asking you is which provision of the DMCA or the copyright act makes this permissible? There are many exemptions granted in the DMCA, but I can't see one which grants an exemption for personal use. Would you be good enough to point it out?

[Poppaea]

Originally Posted by sleepy6553

Newfie56: I was in your position back in November. I knew I wanted a Kindle because it was the best e-reader. I was unhappy that I would not be able to borrow library books as that is where I get most of my books. I received a private message (on another forum) telling me not to let that deter me from buying the Kindle because there is a workaround. You have been offered the opportunity to PM someone on this forum who will help you if you run into problems. That person was a big help for me. Now I can say that checking out library books is easy.

You have also been provided information to help you determine if this workaround is legally and ethically OK with you. This is something that I think each individual user needs to figure out for themselves. I am of the opinion that it is OK as I am borrowing something that I am allowed to borrow. I don't lend it to anyone else. Others disagree. As I said, this is something only you have to decide.

But know that it can be done. It is not hard, even for a novice like me. I did run into a few snags, but the helpful people on this forum walked me through it and everything is up and running smoothly. I have a long wait on some books at the library, and a very short to no wait on others. I'm very satisfied with the outcome. It might be worth a try before your return period for your husband's Kindle expires. You are not modifying your Kindle at all. All the programs and plug-ins are installed on your computer.

Good luck!

But why should anyone trouble to do so? The specification the Threadstarter gave is clear: Easy checkout of library books. The Kindle is not the device made for this task, it was made to buy ebooks from Amazon. And it isn't even the most up-to-date device out there anyway. The push-button-thing is extremely outdated and unconvinient. You don't need wifi to get books from the library. So why keep that thing?

So, the best is to give the Kindle back and buy a Nook or a Sony. If you should really decide become a hacker and strip the DRM you can strip Amazons and read their books on your EpubReader...

[ApK]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Precisely. If you strip DRM to get rights you shouldn't have, then that's a violation. And that's exactly what you're doing when you strip library DRM - you're getting rights you shouldn't have: namely, the right to keep the book indefinitely. Whether or not you choose to exercise that right is of no relevance; the important point is that by removing the DRM you have gained a right that the copyright holder did not intend you to have.

Nonsense. I have the technical ability, not the right. I have the technical ability to photocopy any book I buy and sell copies, but copyright law denies me that right, so I don't do it even if I wanted to.

Same thing here. By your reasoning, No one could legally have ANY protected ebook, because we have the technical ability (what you are wrongly calling a 'right') to read it aloud to a public audience, which copyright protection prohibits us from doing in most cases.

ApK

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Poppaea

But why should anyone trouble to do so? The specification the Threadstarter gave is clear: Easy checkout of library books. The Kindle is not the device made for this task,

If she otherwise did not care for the Kindle, or preferred other hardware, or had not bought one yet, I'd agree wholeheartedly. Get the device that does best what you want most.

ApK

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by ApK

Nonsense. I have the technical ability, not the right. I have the technical ability to photocopy any book I buy and sell copies, but copyright law denies me that right, so I don't do it even if I wanted to.

I think we have a confusion of terminology here. When you say:

If you strip DRM to get rights you shouldn't have then that's a violation.

what do you mean by the word "rights"? I interpreted you to mean "capabilities", but you're saying that you don't mean that? What did you mean?

What is your opinion on the "RealNetworks" case. That was a clear case of a court ruling that it is illegal to remove DRM to enable what would otherwise be "fair use" rights, such as format conversion.