[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[dvd-discuss] Re: DMCA protection of SPAMMING
- To: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: [dvd-discuss] Re: DMCA protection of SPAMMING
- From: Seth Finkelstein <sethf(at)sethf.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:09:18 -0500
- In-reply-to: <4032673B.7669.1EB9ED@localhost>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- User-agent: Mutt/1.4i
The censorware DMCA exemption is very specific to censorware.:
"The particular class of works designated in this rulemaking covers
the lists of websites blocked by commercially marketed filtering
software applications that are intended to prevent access to
domains, websites or portions of Web sites. However, the exempted
class specifically excludes lists of Internet locations blocked by
software designed to protect against damage to computers, such as
firewalls and antivirus software, or software designed to prevent
receipt of unwanted e-mail, such as anti-spam software."
As anti-spam software is excluded, I assume pro-spam software
would be excluded too :-)
Sigh - you can't unrestrict DeCSS by using it on other
material. Doesn't work. Informally, the courts aren't idiots.
Formally, the key standard is:
o (A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls
access to a work protected under this title;
o (B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively
controls access to a work protected under this title;
--
Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer sethf@sethf.com http://sethf.com
Interview: http://grep.law.harvard.edu/article.pl?sid=03/12/16/0526234
Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/