Before the balance of my post, I want to apologize for the poor formatting of this post. The QUOTE function does not appear to function properly for me. Neither do carriage returns to insert spaces after quotations in order to offset them from my commentary.
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass
First you can quote me on the US law gives you permission to post on this forum? The answer is none exists!
Start with a RIGHT
stemming from the First Amendment
and work your way down.
"I have already answered your question by quoting the DMCA. DMCA is an amendment to copyright law. DMCA applies to any copyrighted material. The way the law works, you have to find the section that prohibits a specific action."
Hmm. I suppose you also believe the Constitution is a charter of negative
For starters, you could have quoted section 6 of the Copyright Act in its entirety instead of the single boldfaced item that deals only with public display. There are 5 other enumerations, not to mention more codes (eg 107-122) that further qualify and quantify Copyright 'penumbras and emanations', so to speak. Specific exemptions and illicit activities are documented, making your declaration that you must find a specific prohibition ridiculous since inclusion of all possibilities is impractical as well as impossible unless you are a fortune teller or from the future.
Code 107 from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include— (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."
Note the use of the words "such as
" is not all inclusive nor exclusionary. Also note the mention on "potential market for or value of
". If you use a DRM circumvented ripped copy of the Blu-ray movie on your phone or tablet are you now in violation? Are there not legal methods sold by the copyright owners to businesses such as Netflix and Amazon so that you can view that material on those devices whether on or off your property? Would the circumvention of paying for those alternate sources be affecting the value of or market for copyrighted material?
The definition of Fair Use from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fair_use:
"A copyright principle that excuses unauthorized uses of a work when used for a transformative purpose such as research, scholarship, parody, criticism, or journalism. When determining whether an infringement should be excused on the basis of fair use, a court will use several factors including the purpose and character of the use, amount and substantiality of the portion borrowed, and effect of the use on the market for the copyrighted material. Fair use is a defense rather than an affirmative right -- that is, a particular use only gets established as a fair use if the copyright owner decides to file a lawsuit and the court upholds the fair use defense."
Hmm, I see nothing about home use despite specific examples of when Fair Use is in play. I guess all the attorney's on staff at Nolo's Plain English Dictionary, where attorney's translate law for laypeople, missed it.
The reason you are unable to answer my question about Blu-ray, DRM and ripping, is ultimately due to no case has been decided on this issue.
Lastly, and back to your comment on whether I had read DMCA... why did you fail to read or make mention that immediately after the "Savings Clause" you quoted from come "EXCLUSIONS
"? This section is quite specific and even states these exclusions apply to section 1201. What, pray tell, prevented the designers of the document from excluding private citizen, non-commercial, non-public, home use? I doubt it was because they wanted you to think that it was OK because they didn't mention it.