From owner-freebsd-chat Thu May 16 12:26:56 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mired.org (dsl-64-192-6-133.telocity.com [64.192.6.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A3EE837B419 for ; Thu, 16 May 2002 12:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 2703 invoked by uid 100); 16 May 2002 19:26:41 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15588.2033.334082.580672@guru.mired.org> Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 14:26:41 -0500 To: Rahul Siddharthan Cc: Nils Holland , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The road ahead? In-Reply-To: <20020516210154.L79514@lpt.ens.fr> References: <20020516004909.A9808@daemon.tisys.org> <15586.61471.456290.764885@guru.mired.org> <20020515211922.J1282@darkstar.gte.net> <3CE34A8B.7D999E2C@mindspring.com> <20020516091031.A2259@daemon.tisys.org> <15587.56669.382241.766052@guru.mired.org> <20020516192546.B8944@daemon.tisys.org> <20020516193049.G79514@lpt.ens.fr> <15587.65524.899611.798267@guru.mired.org> <20020516210154.L79514@lpt.ens.fr> X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under 21.1 (patch 14) "Cuyahoga Valley" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ From: Mike Meyer X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/0.55 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In <20020516210154.L79514@lpt.ens.fr>, Rahul Siddharthan typed: > Mike Meyer said on May 16, 2002 at 13:52:36: > > In <20020516193049.G79514@lpt.ens.fr>, Rahul Siddharthan typed: > > > Nils Holland said on May 16, 2002 at 19:25:46: > > > > I should probably try to get some more in-depth information on that topic, > > > > but from the bits and pieces I currently know, this is very insane. Seems > > > > that some companies want to make *any* technology illegal that *could* > > > > theoretically be used to violate the copyright. That's somhow like > > > > outlawing ordinary knives, as these could (illegally) be used to kill > > > > people... > > > That's exactly what the DMCA is about. > > Half right. The DMCA proper doesn't have the hardware requirement on > > the computer industry, nor does it make it illegal to break the > > encryption even if you don't violate the copyright. > I'm not sure about private use, but it *does* forbid you to tell > people how you break encryption, and it *does* outlaw devices which > let you break the encryption, regardless of intent. That's exactly > what both the DeCSS and the Sklyarov cases were about -- both DeCSS > and Elcomsoft's program have legitimate uses but that doesn't matter > under the DMCA. It's an exact analogy to the knife example above. Um, no. The DMCA makes it illegal to *distribute* such device, not to *own* them. The Elcomsoft and DeCSS cases were because the people in question started *distributing* them. > > > This week's lwn.net has an interesting comment: recently people have > > > reported that copy-protected audio CDs can be played/ripped simply by > > > covering their outer tracks with a black marker or a Post-It. If that > > > is so, black markers and Post-Its are devices that can be used to > > > circumvent digital copy controls, and therefore should be illegal > > > under the DMCA... > > lwn.net is in violation of the DMCA. The people using black tape > > etc. are not, but would be in violation of the SSSCA if it were > > passed. > I'm not sure what the legal status is of people who use tape in their > homes, but the manufacturers of the tape are already in violation of > the DMCA for distributing a device which can be used to violate copy > controls. No, they're not. First, the DMCA only covers works that are copy protected by some mechanism. Second, there's a surcharge on audio and video tapes that goes to the MPAA/RIAA to distribute as royalties. The latter is part of a long-standing agreement making it legal to timeshift movies, brought about when Sony was sued for aiding and abetting copyright violation with the betamax. > The SSSCA (renamed CBDTPA) went further: it insisted that all > computers and similar devices must include copy-control mechanisms. > The DMCA forbids bypassing such mechanisms, while the CBDTPA insists > on installing such mechanisms everywhere, so that you're thoroughly > locked in. Yup. What does CBDTPA stand for? http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message