Title from the article. Interesting article, with some good words from our DRM-free favorite Cory Doctorow.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/40754848
Title from the article. Interesting article, with some good words from our DRM-free favorite Cory Doctorow.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/40754848
The DMCA makes it pretty clear that “Circumvention of Technological Protection Measures” is illegal. There are no exceptions for whether you own or redistribute the content in question.
It’s not needed.
If another law says you have a right to create backups of digital content you own, then two laws are in conflict. Why would dcma have precedence?
No idea about US, but in some countries it would be up to judges, and with enough rulings it would be settled one way or another.
Aussie copyright law gives us the right to circumvent protections in order to make copies to watch on a device the original can’t be played on.
Linux out of the box is remarkably incompatible with DRM protected content and so makes an excellent thing on which one might want to watch, listen to, or read a thing
You don’t happen to know what whereabouts in legislation that’s detailed, do you?
Circumvention: https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca1968133/s116an.html
That law doesn’t exist and that’s not how law works. Law does not specify what is allowed, only what isn’t. Breaking encryption isn’t.
It exists in Sweden. We are allowed to make private copies of movies, music and whatever. If I want to rip a CD and give it to my family and friends that is 100% legal. But it’s not legal to sell the copies.
Didn’t realize the DMCA applied in Sweden.
What are you talking about? Law absolutely can specify that something is allowed.
The right for a private good exists. In the same way different countries exist, different views in copyright and the right to backup exists.
We were talking about laws, not rights or views.
I don’t care what some stupid US law says. It doesn’t apply to me.
That’s great. This conversation was about the US.
It really wasn’t.
You tried to make it about the US when the topic is about a company that operates internationally, that’s what.
Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised is breaking national law in many countries with their one-size-fits-all approach.
But I’d rather just not give a crap about that and just keep pirating my books.
It really was. Do you not know what the DMCA is? It’s US law.