![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
all_strange_wonderscheck this out:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/11/1248219
http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2007/05/10/afx3708595.html
Apple, Microsoft, Real Networks, and Adobe are all facing possible lawsuits for not using a particular company's DRM technology. Not, bear in mind, for not using any kind of DRM at all, but for not using this particular company's.
The reason they give?
"The failure to use an available copyright protection solution contravenes the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which prohibits the manufacture of any product or technology designed to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a copyrighted work or protects the rights of copyright owners." (emphasis added)
Now, this sounds like complete bullshit to me. My reading of that little paragraph says there's nothing wrong with not using DRM in the first place, or with using one form of DRM instead of another- the bad thing according to the DMCA is to circumvent any kind of DRM or copy protection the work in question does have.
Clearly, it's somebody's crazy time.
This goes to show, however, that it's time for those of us who are active participants in an increasingly digital world to sit down and find sane, sensible ways to protect the rights of both copyright holders and consumers, and to salvage fair use before it goes the way of the dinosaurs. Wouldn't it be nice if people couldn't sue you for copying a movie you bought to your iPod? Corporations are in charge of copyright law right now, and if they have their way, you'll have to buy a separate copy for every computer, television, and iPod you own.
We get so fired up over other things- well, this is part of our lives too. Isn't it time we started to do something about it?
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/11/1248219
http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2007/05/10/afx3708595.html
Apple, Microsoft, Real Networks, and Adobe are all facing possible lawsuits for not using a particular company's DRM technology. Not, bear in mind, for not using any kind of DRM at all, but for not using this particular company's.
The reason they give?
"The failure to use an available copyright protection solution contravenes the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which prohibits the manufacture of any product or technology designed to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a copyrighted work or protects the rights of copyright owners." (emphasis added)
Now, this sounds like complete bullshit to me. My reading of that little paragraph says there's nothing wrong with not using DRM in the first place, or with using one form of DRM instead of another- the bad thing according to the DMCA is to circumvent any kind of DRM or copy protection the work in question does have.
Clearly, it's somebody's crazy time.
This goes to show, however, that it's time for those of us who are active participants in an increasingly digital world to sit down and find sane, sensible ways to protect the rights of both copyright holders and consumers, and to salvage fair use before it goes the way of the dinosaurs. Wouldn't it be nice if people couldn't sue you for copying a movie you bought to your iPod? Corporations are in charge of copyright law right now, and if they have their way, you'll have to buy a separate copy for every computer, television, and iPod you own.
We get so fired up over other things- well, this is part of our lives too. Isn't it time we started to do something about it?
