I watched the first 10-15 minutes of this and have to say, while I agree with him on principle, he’s either misinformed or exaggerating the anti-circumvention regulation. There are a number of exemptions in anti-circumvention laws in the US for personal use. How far this goes was made clear in court, Apple took the creators of an iOS jailbreak to court and lost, making it clear that jailbreaking is not illegal, even though it clearly circumvents the “protection” system in place. Similar applies to circumventing DRM for backup copies of media, for instance.
Of course, I would rather see no anti-circumvention legislation whatsoever, but the way he misportrays the situation makes me question his credibility.
The “anti-‐circumvention” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), codified in
section 1201 of the Copyright Act, have not been used as Congress envisioned. The law was
ostensibly intended to stop copyright infringers from defeating anti-‐piracy protections added to
copyrighted works.[1]
In practice, the anti-‐circumvention provisions have been used to stifle a wide array of legitimate
activities. As a result, the DMCA has become a serious threat to several important public policy
priorities:
The DMCA Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.
Experience with section 1201 demonstrates that it is being used to stifle free speech and scientific
research. The lawsuit against 2600 magazine, threats against Princeton Professor Edward Felten’s
team of researchers, and prosecution of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov have chilled the
legitimate activities of journalists, publishers, scientists, students, programmers, and members of
the public.
The DMCA Jeopardizes Fair Use.
By banning all acts of circumvention, and all technologies and tools that can be used for
circumvention, the DMCA grants to copyright owners the power to unilaterally eliminate the
public’s fair use rights. Already, the movie industry’s use of encryption on DVDs has curtailed
consumers’ ability to make legitimate, personal-‐use copies of movies they have purchased.
The DMCA Impedes Competition and Innovation.
Rather than focusing on pirates, some have wielded the DMCA to hinder legitimate competitors.
For example, the DMCA has been used to block aftermarket competition in laser printer toner
cartridges, garage door openers, videogame console accessories, and computer maintenance1
services. Similarly, Apple has used the DMCA to tie its iPhone devices to Apple’s own software and
services.
I watched the first 10-15 minutes of this and have to say, while I agree with him on principle, he’s either misinformed or exaggerating the anti-circumvention regulation. There are a number of exemptions in anti-circumvention laws in the US for personal use. How far this goes was made clear in court, Apple took the creators of an iOS jailbreak to court and lost, making it clear that jailbreaking is not illegal, even though it clearly circumvents the “protection” system in place. Similar applies to circumventing DRM for backup copies of media, for instance.
Of course, I would rather see no anti-circumvention legislation whatsoever, but the way he misportrays the situation makes me question his credibility.
The EFF have a page on this, setting out the threats:
https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-16-years-under-dmca
…which is mostly a link to:
https://www.eff.org/files/2014/09/16/unintendedconsequences2014.pdf
…whose summary reads as follows.
The “anti-‐circumvention” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), codified in section 1201 of the Copyright Act, have not been used as Congress envisioned. The law was ostensibly intended to stop copyright infringers from defeating anti-‐piracy protections added to copyrighted works.[1] In practice, the anti-‐circumvention provisions have been used to stifle a wide array of legitimate activities. As a result, the DMCA has become a serious threat to several important public policy priorities:
The DMCA Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.
Experience with section 1201 demonstrates that it is being used to stifle free speech and scientific research. The lawsuit against 2600 magazine, threats against Princeton Professor Edward Felten’s team of researchers, and prosecution of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov have chilled the legitimate activities of journalists, publishers, scientists, students, programmers, and members of the public.
The DMCA Jeopardizes Fair Use.
By banning all acts of circumvention, and all technologies and tools that can be used for circumvention, the DMCA grants to copyright owners the power to unilaterally eliminate the public’s fair use rights. Already, the movie industry’s use of encryption on DVDs has curtailed consumers’ ability to make legitimate, personal-‐use copies of movies they have purchased.
The DMCA Impedes Competition and Innovation.
Rather than focusing on pirates, some have wielded the DMCA to hinder legitimate competitors. For example, the DMCA has been used to block aftermarket competition in laser printer toner cartridges, garage door openers, videogame console accessories, and computer maintenance1 services. Similarly, Apple has used the DMCA to tie its iPhone devices to Apple’s own software and services.