AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,304 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
For those that think that some of us are paranoid about the MPAA and copy protection, here's some food for thought. This article from TechTV should wake you up.

Quote:


Skip Ads on DVDs, Go to Jail?


Court ruling may erode 'fair use' consumer rights to use copyright works.


By Maria Godoy, TechTV News

April 26, 2001



The next time you sit down to watch a DVD and skip past the advertisements, you could be breaking the law.


This scenario may sound far-fetched, but depending on the outcome of a May 1 federal appeals court's review of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of 1998, it could become all too true, opponents of the law say.


Designed to protect copyrights in the age of digital piracy, the DMCA makes it illegal to make or "offer to the public a device" -- whether it be software, hardware, or other means -- to circumvent technological protections in order to gain unauthorized access to any copyright work.


But opponents say the law is eroding the cherished concept of "fair use" -- an extension of First Amendment protections for free speech -- that allows the copying of copyright works for such purposes as teaching, researching, library archiving, news reporting, and criticism.


"Activities that have been lawful and legal are now under threat," said Robin Gross, an intellectual property and fair use attorney with the civil liberties group Electronic Frontier Foundation.


Next Tuesday, the EFF is set to square off against the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) before the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. The outcome of the case could determine whether fair use freedoms consumers now enjoy -- such as the ability to record television shows on their VCRs for later viewing -- will still hold up in the age of CDs, DVDs, and other digital media.



Bye, bye, fair use?



At the center of the controversy is a Linux open-source software program called DeCSS that can decrypt DVDs, potentially making it easier to distribute pirated movie files online. When Web journalist Eric Corley posted links to the code on his website, 2600, the film industry sued him under the DMCA.


Rejecting the argument that the DMCA violates the First Amendment, last August US District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ordered Corley to remove the links. That interpretation of the law will be at the center of Tuesday's appeals hearing.


"Judge Kaplan has held that fair use is not a defense to anything in the DMCA," said Jessica Litman, a law professor at Wayne State University and author of the new book "Digital Copyright." "If the ruling holds up, the implications for free speech are huge. We're going to have to get used to a whole new set of rules in the free exchange of information."


According to Gross of the EFF, which is funding Corley's defense, Kaplan's interpretation of the DMCA's provisions against circumventing copyright protections effectively nullifies previous fair use rights.


"If you apply the logic of this ruling to videos, it would mean that although recording 'David Letterman' is constitutionally protected, the use of VCRs to record the show and Circuit City's trafficking in them are both illegal," Gross said.



Repercussions for consumers



Congress passed the DMCA over the objections of academics, civil libertarians, technologists, and others who foresaw that the law's provisions against circumventing copyright protections could stifle free speech and scientific innovation, giving copyright holders unprecedented control over the way consumers experience digital works.


"The big tragedy of this law is that it passed without much public input," Litman said. "We failed to show just how widespread its affects could be." Now, she says, the consequences are becoming much too clear.


The recording industry successfully prevented Edward Felten, a Princeton computer scientist, from presenting a paper at a conference Thursday describing how to circumvent a music-encryption technology promoted by the Secure Digital Music Initiative, an industry group. The recording industry had threatened to sue Felten under the DMCA.


While legal experts say it's unlikely that type of scientific gag order would hold up in court, the incident illustrates how copyright holders might use their deep pockets to intimidate individual scientists and squelch free speech.


The end result is that "existing economic interests get to decide what forms of innovation get allowed," said Lawrence Lessig, a renowned cyberlaw expert with appointments at both Harvard and Stanford.


Lessig is among the many legal experts who warn that if the DMCA is upheld, consumers might soon lose certain privileges they've long been accustomed to. For example, while consumers can legally loan a friend a CD they've paid for, it would be illegal to share a legitimately obtained MP3 file if, for example, it is password protected.


DVD viewing might also take a hit, legal experts note. Entertainment companies such as Disney, an MPAA member, are beginning to use encryption technology to prevent DVD viewers from skipping past commercials that precede movies. Under the DMCA, it is illegal to try to fiddle with the code in order to avoid being forced to sit through ads before enjoying the show.


The MPAA, says Litman, "is using the DMCA to actually control the individual's private experience in an unprecedented way."


Emily Kutner, a spokesperson for the MPAA, dismissed the notion that her group would use the DMCA to launch legal attacks against individual consumers.


"That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard," Kutner said. The MPAA, she said, is interested in preventing piracy, not controlling consumers.


But pointing to the music industry's threats against Felton, the EFF's Gross notes, "We've already seen an abuse of this power from the entertainment industry."



------------------

Vic Ruiz
STOP HDCP/DFAST/5C
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,884 Posts
Quote:
"Judge Kaplan has held that fair use is not a defense to anything in the DMCA," said Jessica Litman, a law professor at Wayne State University and author of the new book "Digital Copyright."
Jessica Litman is increasingly being quoted in this area. I bought her book when I saw multiple references to her at various places recently. It was excellent.


I very highly recommend it for anyone interested in how the DMCA promises to become a real pain.


- Tom


------------------

Getting started:
HTPC FAQ , DScaler , Xcel's Links , and
What's Wrong with Copy Protection .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,797 Posts
The real irony of this situation is that the senator that originally offerred the DMCA - Tom Leahy, if I recall, recently expressed profound reservations about the law and its use by the Recording and Motion Picture trade associations to squelch consumer fair-use.


If we fail in the courts, it's gonna be a long, dark night, since Hollywood gives very large sums of money to congressional campaigns, typically Democrats (which now hold power in the Senate). This influence will make it very hard, IMO, to get the law repealed or amended.


------------------
ABC = Another Boring Channel. Watch CBS on Monday Nights!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,884 Posts
Quote:
If we fail in the courts, it's gonna be a long, dark night, since Hollywood gives very large sums of money to congressional campaigns, typically Democrats (which now hold power in the Senate). This influence will make it very hard, IMO, to get the law repealed or amended.
Maybe not. There could be some popular support once Ma & Pa Sixpack realize that they are now the target. They can now be arrested for something they do with a legally purchased movie in the privacy of their own home.


Those types of laws haven't tended to be popular if anyone actually seems to be trying to enforce them. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif


People are liable to start to ask, what is this intellectual property stuff anyway?


And why do we care if someone has an 'incentive'? I mean promising someone an incentive, that sounds like a bribe, right?


And just because someone wrote some words on a piece of paper, do we really want to forbid anyone else from using those same words for 100 years? Or forever?


People just might start thinking the cost of this is really just too high. And it is.


After all, copyrights are really just small government sponsored monopolies. Let's deregulate and let the market decide. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif


- Tom



------------------

Getting started:
HTPC FAQ , DScaler , Xcel's Links , and
What's Wrong with Copy Protection .
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,564 Posts
Was that Patrick Leahy (democrat)? How much soft money did he receive from the MPAA? If he feels so bad, how about holding a hearing? Crocodile tears, imho.


BTW, for laughs, Patricks Leahy's comment on Judge Jacksons ruling on microsoft:

Quote:
The decision confirms the new vigor in antitrust oversight, and that trend is good for consumers and for the economy...
His comment on the (partial) overturn of that ruling by the court of appeals


Quote:
"Microsoft has long given us cutting-edge products that have helped make the American software sector the envy of the world. But the line between aggressive competition and anti-competitive behavior can be difficult to draw. This decision brightens that line...
------------------

Alex
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top