New DMCA exemption

[gotenks794]

But the music industry doesn't really care that much either, amirite? There's those 3 bands that we're not allowed to upload but that's been that way for many years and no new ones have been added...

For the org, i mean. Not talking about the youtube community.

[dokidoki]

The stupid part is, this ruling is specific to pure CSS on DVDs. BRDs are a whole separate ball game, as are the DVDs that implement a combination of CSS and bad sector writes.

Good point, I hadn't thought about those. Also note that the request for exemption has been discussed here before. I actually forgot about that thread until Mimi Ito IMed me about the decision. I forgot that she had emailed me asking for information to support this proposal back in January 2009, and I linked her to that thread to say that we'd heard of it.

[BasharOfTheAges]

You also have to, y'know, do it all yourself from scratch, because they didn't exempt the trafficking in devices that break encryption for you part of the DMCA.

This was a very pyrrhic victory.

[dwchang]

I was wondering when someone would post this. I debated doing so earlier this morning, but knew someone would be up to the task (i.e. I'm lazy). Good to see you're on the ball Tim .

[Qyot27]

as are the DVDs that implement a combination of CSS and bad sector writes.

I would superficially think that bad sector writes would have a hard time surviving a court case if they were argued for that. They break compatibility with all sorts of things, including DVD players themselves. There's got to be something about that which would make it more akin to intentional damage, so things to cope with them are more about data recovery and preservation than about circumvention (circumvention is only a side-effect of said recovery, if it can even be proved such methods are actually DRM, and not an instance of a company selling consumers goods that are faulty-by-design...which I can only imagine would end badly for them, not the consumer, since they're the ones selling the damaged goods).

[Megamom]

No music... no win

[outlawed]

"Persons making noninfringing uses of the following six classes of works will not be subject to the prohibition against circumventing access controls (17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1)) until the conclusion of the next rulemaking."

Cool. We're temporarily violating one less dumb law =p

[BasharOfTheAges]

as are the DVDs that implement a combination of CSS and bad sector writes.

I would superficially think that bad sector writes would have a hard time surviving a court case if they were argued for that. They break compatibility with all sorts of things, including DVD players themselves. There's got to be something about that which would make it more akin to intentional damage, so things to cope with them are more about data recovery and preservation than about circumvention (circumvention is only a side-effect of said recovery, if it can even be proved such methods are actually DRM, and not an instance of a company selling consumers goods that are faulty-by-design...which I can only imagine would end badly for them, not the consumer, since they're the ones selling the damaged goods).

It's an intentional tactic to prevent ripping that was used by Sony for Playstation games for years. I've seen it claimed to be part of some DVD encryption schemes specifically to thwart deCSS, They probably have internal memos that support this intent.

[Qyot27]

It's an intentional tactic to prevent ripping that was used by Sony for Playstation games for years. I've seen it claimed to be part of some DVD encryption schemes specifically to thwart deCSS, They probably have internal memos that support this intent.

I know, but using it for the PlayStation is different than using it for DVD, because the PlayStation should have the proper measures to counteract it, seeing as both are Sony products. Because it's not a part of DVD spec, though, there have been issues with such discs in DVD players. 'Encryption' tactic or not, to any normal consumer, that constitutes a broken and faulty product, which the company should rightly be held accountable for. The same was true, on a much bigger and nastier scale, for the rootkit fiasco...and that was an intentional tactic to prevent ripping, too (and similarly, in violation of Red Book specifications).

But what am I thinking here, consumers don't have any rights. That's where this crap is ultimately headed, after all. The companies already think that way as it is, it's just a question of how much time the government spends kow-towing to them that matters. Pretty soon they'll be lying totally prostrate at the industry's feet.

[BasharOfTheAges]

well, yes - as i said twice before in this thread; even though you have the right to break CSS for fair use reasons now, you can't do so unless you construct the software from the ground up yourself - the tools that other people made weren't made exempt in this ruling (or the other ruling that came out of the 5th circuit today). Trafficking in those tools is still a DMCA violation. In essence they made the act legal, but the tools you need to commit the act are still not. Completely worthless ruling.