Slashdot Mirror
IEEE Drops DMCA Reference in Authors Copyright Form
aurelian writes "a follow-up on this story in April: the IEEE has announced that they have re-revised their copyright form and dropped the requirement that authors verify their work does not violate the DMCA. Seems to be as a result of feedback from their authors/members. Of course authors still have to comply with the act - they just don't have to see it mentioned in the new form."
From the US governmental point of view of course the whole world (and beyond) has to comply with US laws. Besides, since the IEEE journals are published in the US it is also reasonable to believe that US law applies to all articles, regardless where the authors are residing.
But of course it's a good sign the IEEE is "dropping active support" for the DMCA.
Well, I'm sure my reaction to this news was similar to those of most of the slashbots. However, I've been thinking about it, and the IEEE may have done the community a disservice, in some sense.
By removing the requirement that authors verify DMCA compliance, the IEEE has removed a constant reminder of the DMCA's blatant disregard for rights. The sneaky thing is, the DMCA still applies in all of its unconstitutional glory. So this provides no added protection to authors, but does encourage people to forget about the DMCA entirely.
Ignoring the DMCA is not going to make it go away. We need to raise awareness by putting notices and warnings everywhere, to the point of absurdity. Imagine if segregationists had not posted "Whites Only" signs on restaurants, but had quietly asked blacks to leave instead. The reason civil rights legislation went through is because of the constant visual reminders.
We need to bring back these kinds of requirements, and start making software that battles copyright infringement (according to the letter of the law) proactively. XMMS should present a dialog box every time a new song starts, asking the user to verify that he or she has the right to listen to it. Windows should force the user to confirm that every program run is legal and paid for.
If we let the DMCA become a silent force, then we have no one to blame but ourselves when in sneaks up on society and clubs it over the head.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
Remember that the DMCA has provisions allowing exemptions for research related work. Serious papers, written by degreed and credentialed scientists and engineers, published in journals are very likely to qualify for the exemption. And that would include papers describing weaknesses in an encryption system, including the publishing of code exploiting or demonstrating those weaknesses.
l
If someone were to write a similar paper without those credentials, and published the paper on the web without also putting it in a journal, that person would have an uphill battle proving that his intention was research and not hacking.
Look at section 1201(g)(3) for factors showing how courts are supposed to determine whether you are a legitimate researcher or a criminal hacker.
http://eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/1201.htm
I'm glad the IEEE dropped it's absurd cheerleading for a law that contradicts the first amendment. It's a shame that the Edward Felten case was dropped. It could have been the test case that drove the DMCA all the way to the Supreme Court, where it would have been ruled unconstitutional. The Dmitry Skylarov case, if it goes that far, isn't such a blatantly obvious abridgement of free speech, so the courts might not understand how much a danger the DMCA is to the first amendment. I sure hope that they are paying attention to current events. This whole thing reminds me of an old chinese curse, May you live in interesting times.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.