Copyright Office Asks For Public Comments On DMCA

krygny writes "A number of news sites (ZDnet, theregister) are reporting that the US Copyright Office is accepting feedback on the affects of the DMCA. While it's unlikley to prompt changes in the law, lucid and valid anectdotes of how fair use of certain materials is infriged upon, may help determine the degree and nature of enforcement."

Comments

Write!

[Vote Libertarian!]

Tell these people that you will vote Libertarian only until these tyrannical laws are abolished! These politicians only understand the vote count. It's the only way to change things.

Vote Libertarian!

Posting comments here won't cut it.

[macdaddy357]

We all enjoy posting comments here, but they won't be read by the copyright office. Carefully craft your words, and write them.

Re:Posting comments here won't cut it.

[El_Nofx]

Ya, and someone should remind us all on the 19th of November when they actually do start letting us comment, most /.ers have a memory like a fruit fly.

Let's not shoot ourselves in the collective feet

[Illserve]

The surest way to ensure the DMCA is repealed is to have it interpreted in the strictest and most rigorous sense.

Having the DMCA interpreted with a lenient bent is like having the constitution amended to allow "just a little" slavery.

If we truly want all or nothing vis a vis the DMCA, let's not plead for a lenient interpretation.

Re:Ummm...

[miltimj]

It'll will probably make you look a little more intelligent.

It'll certainly will.

Really

[CodeWheeney]

I know, this is Karma whoring, but:

lucid and valid anectdotes?

From Slashdot?

/. has a few things to say...

[Anonymous Coward]

We Might Have Some Problems With It.

What good will this really do?

[kcbrown]

I mean, the Copyright Office doesn't enforce anything. That's the job of the executive branch: the FBI, the DOJ, etc. They can, and do, enforce whatever laws they want to enforce, and in any way they want to (depending, of course, on the instructions they receive from their corporate masters).

So how can writing up and sending in your thoughts about the DMCA to the Copyright Office have any more effect on anything related to the DMCA than posting to Slashdot?

It's not like most members of Congress are going to listen to these comments, since they owe their allegience to the corporations and not the people...

Re:What good will this really do?

[reallocate]

Here's a passage from the Copyright Office's notice:


"The Copyright Office is preparing to conduct proceedings mandated by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which provides that the Librarian of Congress may exempt certain classes of works from the prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. The purpose of this rulemaking proceeding is to determine whether there are particular classes of works as to which users are, or are likely to be, adversely affected in their ability to make noninfringing uses due to the prohibition on circumvention."

The Copyright Office can, within a rather limited scope, define exceptions to the DMCA.

Re:Wow...

[Orne]

Even Slashdot beat Slashdot to the story abou... wait a minute...

Not until November 19, 2002

[sdo1]

The Copyright Office page says "Electronic submissions may be made through this website beginning Nov. 19, 2002, through Dec. 18."

That's more than a month away. That'll slip right off my radar screen unless I have a reminder.

Put it in your PDA. In your favorite scheduling software. In you little black book. On your fridge. Whatever you like, but do it NOW. This is a really good way for the evils of the DMCA to be entered into record, even if (for now) it's just a formality.

-S

Re:Vent then bend over

[badnews_bear]

While I agree with you in that the only people who have their hands in this are the ones with the bills (read: dollar) in their hands, we cannot continue to think that way. The idea that the only people who are making the laws are the ones with the the money or the ones who can give the money to the lawmakers is false logic. It is only that way because we, the people, LET it get that way. I said this before, but I feel that it bears repeating until everyone gets it in their heads. You can make a difference in this. QUIT BUYING MUSIC. See how long the DMCA lasts against a consumer strike on digital goods (read: CD's). And yes, I can bitch because I no longer buy music of any sort (nor do I download it)....

what to exempt....

[Alcimedes]

let's see. i want cd's out of there. then movies.

why?

i like to listen to cd's on my computer. sadly enough, my monitor is larger than my TV, so i watch movies on there too.

if it's already illegal to make and sell copies of these cd's and movies anyway, what the hell is the DMCA doing other than stifling research into useful apps. for everyday folks.

if someone is making an illegal copy and selling it, throw them in jail. there have been laws in place to do this for years.

reminds me of people who want to create more restrictive gun laws. problem is no one is enforcing the ones that we already have.

does it make you feel any better that the criminal broke 17 laws to shoot your ass instead of 15 laws?

didn't think so.

same with this. if it's already illegal to mass produce and sell these cd's/movies, what's the DMCA really doing anyway?

Fair use

[roman_mir]

I must be able to buy a movie on a DVD and play this movie on a computer of my choice under operating system of my choice. If I choose to play the movie under some distribution of open source operating system, or any GNU (free software) operating system I must be able to do so. DMCA makes it impossible to legally play my DVD under GNU/Linux for example, since MPAA will not allow a license for DVD player software to be distributed under GNU; DMCA makes it illegal to reverse engineer DVD format.

MPAA DMCA FAQ

Question:

Doesn't the DMCA allow reverse engineering for compatibility, for example to allow playing of a DVD on a Linux operating system-driven personal computer?

Answer:

The DMCA does allow reverse engineering. However, the reverse engineering provisions in the DMCA were never intended to enable anyone to circumvent technical protection measures (TPMs) for the purpose of gaining unauthorized access to or making unauthorized copies of copyrighted works.

The DMCA does allow a lawful user of a computer program to circumvent TPMs to ensure that the program can work with other programs (interoperability); and, with strict limitations, the research may be shared with others, as long as it does not infringe the copyright in the original or a related work. However, reverse engineering is not permissible if there is a readily available commercial alternative for that purpose. In this case, there exist MANY commercially available DVD players.

Just vote.

[gpinzone]

All we have to do is simply get people to vote, period. Politicians only listen to people that vote for them and/or give them money. That basically means that they listen to only a small minority of the population. My philosphy used to be "if you're stupid enough not to vote, then your opinions don't count." I still don't disagree with that idea, it's just that politicians no longer look to comprimise. They just play to their particular base of supporters that gaurentee them a vote. The only solution is to make it a law that every citizen MUST vote.

Education

[Anonvmous Coward]

I'm an aspiring Visual FX animator. One day I'd like to do blue screen and green screen compositing. This is easy enough to do with a video camera and some blue tarp, but it is not the same as working under studio conditions.

Here's an example: In the Scooby Doo movie, there's a scene where a creature picks up Velma and she tugs on it's ears thinking it's a mask. In the 'Making of' part of the DVD, they show how they filmed that. They suspended the actress on wires up against a blue mockup of the creature. Then they cut out the wires and the blue parts, and inserted a CG creature in the shot.

This is not something I can do in my garage without a huge personal expendature. Thankfully, though, the DVD of the Scooby Doo movie contains the unprocessed footage. Normally, I'd rip the section of the DVD to an .AVI file and do some practice work on that. If I can master some of the techniques the FX studio made for that movie, I have a real shot at working in the industry. In other words, the ability to legally rip this DVD would not only provide me eductational resources, but I'd also get hired by the same indsutry that's trying to prevent me from doing just that.

The DMCA prevents me from legally extracting this footage that I purchased. It really kind of bugs me. A student who's learning to paint can copy a painting, but I cannot take the steps I need to learn a trade that I cannot learn in school.

My $.015

[Saint Mitchell]

Do you like your Compaq computer?

If the DMCA had existed back in the day Compaq wouldn't have been legally allowed to reverse engineer the IBM bios and make PCs as common as they are today. A whole insdustry sprang from something now no longer possible. Many of the asian countries don't give two shits about your IP. They will reverse engineer it and make it better/cheper/faster. Why? Because they can. All the DMCA does is screw the small guy with the dream.

Suggestions on what to do

[Anonymous Coward]

If you feel strongly and want your voice to count, consider doing the following:

1. Plan on spending some time (~1-2 hour(s)).

2. Get remedial edication on DCMA
http://anti-dmca.org/
http://www.educause.edu/issues/dmca.html
and many other sites.

3. First (today/tomorrow), write to your Congressperson AND Senators on the wider view of why DMCA is a "bad thing" for society. Give some simple examples. Use your own words - no form letters, please. Write your message both in a text file so it can be pasted in an e-mail and a web-form (the method of communication varies between different legistative members).

http://www.senate.gov/
http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Select the senators/congresspersons you want to write to and send them e-mail or fill out the web form.

4. Be reasonable, respectful and all that - basic human relations stuff (and spell check!). Include your contact information.

5. Mark your calendar for Nov 19 (OR the week of Thanksgiving - what a good thing to do after you are stuffed with leftover turkey and resting the next day when most people are shopping) to write a *separate letter* to the Copyright office. Deal only with the narrow context of their request on interpretation and exceptions (but the irst letter to the congress-folks should deal with DMCA in the wider context).

http://www.copyright.gov/1201/fr2002-4.pdf for the context.

6. Write a short note to the same congress-folks you wrote before and CC them the letter to the Copyright office, emphasizing that the problem is with the DMCA itself, not the narrow copyright only context.

You may tell them it is more preferable to legistate human behavior rather than specific technologies.

Yes, it is work to paricipate in decision making. If we aren't willing to find some time to make the right input to the right people at the right time, we can't make a difference.

--
Rathinam

My stab at it:

[octalgirl]

Let's look at the case of DeCSS, a software tool designed to break the Content Scramble System (CSS) used by the MPAA in an attempt to protect it's intellectual property. . The DMCA was pivotal in the MPAAs lawsuits against three separate websites that hosted DeCSS or similar copyright circumvention tools, one just for linking to it.

Just as virus protection companies must strengthen and improve their software after each new virus is introduced, and operating system (OS) manufacturers and other software companies must develop a more secure system for each security hole found, then so must any corporation, especially so the entertainment industry, who wish to develop solid technical applications. They cannot be exempted from the forceful nature of making a better product.

This make it-break it-make it again process is simply inherent to the development of better software and hardware. Every single technological evolution that we have experienced in the last decade alone can find its humble beginnings in some earlier discovery; whether it is software, protocol, hardware or written word.

The DMCA fails miserably when technical experts, software engineers, scientists or the next encryption expert, are not allowed to dissect, discover and expand upon the potential of some new (or possibly old) element of technology. Especially when traditional copyrights and the patent process already exist to protect the actual inventor or original product. Can we even imagine a world if a company such as IBM were able to use something like the DMCA to prevent the creation IBM cloned PCs?

People learn one thing, then we pull it apart, see if it will break, turn it over and inspect every corner to see if it can be made better, bigger, smaller, cheaper, easier, safer, more secure - the list goes on. It is human nature to explore in this manner, from all things in earth and science, especially in science, and most especially in technology. To exclude any portion of software or hardware development because it appears to 'infringe' on one corporate entity, basically brings future developments to a stand still. A poor product forced upon the public with little hope of change in sight because it is illegal to improve upon its humble beginnings. Since the DMCA silenced the masses in regards to creating and then breaking copyright protection devices the world may never know what could have been.

Today, in the year 2002, we may be able to define what a "unlawful copyright circumvention device" is, using today's standards and our naïve knowledge of what they are. How will it be defined just ten years from now, or twenty? If the DMCA is not corrected, the definition will be exactly the same.

Note - if you see any holes in this please point them out - thanks