RE: [dvd-discuss] Circumvention Device Definition

["Richard Hartman" <hartman(at)onetouch.com>]

I do wish they had the words "for purpose of violating
copyright restrictions" or some such in that definition . . .


-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Seth Finkelstein [mailto:sethf@sethf.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 3:07 AM
> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: [dvd-discuss] Circumvention Device Definition
> 
> 
> 	Much as it's fun to proclaim "Magic Markers Are A
> Circumvention Device" (and Therefore The DMCA Is Absurd), let's
> not forget the technical definition in the law does take that
> issue into account:
> 
>  * (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of
>           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>     circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that
>     effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this
>     title in a work or a portion thereof;
>  * (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use
>                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>     other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological
>     measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner
>     under this title in a work or a portion thereof; or
>  * (C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert
>     with that person with that person's knowledge for use in
>     circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that
>     effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this
>     title in a work or a portion thereof.
> 
> 	I must admit I've wondered about that part (C) - "marketed".
> It does seem to me to arguably cover e.g. an eBay auction that says
> "Magic Markers - great for circumventing CD copying restrictions". 
> hat's odd to my techie-mindset. But it actually seems to fit the legal
> framework around earlier infringement-capable devices (i.e., you can
> in general sell a device that has an infringing use, but marketing it
> for the explicit purpose of infringement is a no-no).
> 
> -- 
> Seth Finkelstein  Consulting Programmer  sethf@sethf.com  
http://sethf.com
Anticensorware Investigations - http://sethf.com/anticensorware/
Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/