Slashdot Mirror
TEACH vs. DMCA Showdown Looming
TVmisGuided writes "A copyright showdown between the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) and the Teach (Technology Education and Copyright Harmonization) Act is brewing that will have serious implications on the future of higher education on-line. The article
from Chronicle.com spells out the upcoming brouhaha. IMO, this will be one of the strongest litmus tests of the DMCA since it was signed into law in the U.S."
How many "one of the strongest test" will we need to go against DMCA ?
This is a little silly, I think. They just submitted comments that the laws "may, in certain situations" collide. This hasn't occurred yet, therefore there isn't any "bruhaha" court battle or anything silly like that... so how is this some major battle to reshape the DMCA?
Run. I like water. Push My rutabaga.
We've known for a while that the DMCA collides with other laws and rights for a while, most notably fair use. So my question is what makes this any more of a legal victory other than the Copyright Office making an oppinion on this particular issue? How can this collision be any stronger than other colliding laws?
It's important if it (or any of the others) go to a high enough court that it can recognize how poorly written the DMCA is and do something to get rid of it. The clearer-cut the collision or violation, the more likely it is to illustrate the inanity of the DMCA and to help us get rid of it.
Do something about world hunger. Click here
Even if this throws out the DMCA, RIAA and the MPAA will just try again with another law to ensure that you are only listening/watching things THEY signed, and making sure you pay WAY to much for them. As long as they have $$ there will be plenty of copyright laws.
McD
People who are against human cloning must be bitter they are not good enough to be cloned.
I think at this time it is important to understand that the real problem isn't the DMCA, but copyright monopolies. The DMCA (and also infinite extensions) are just a consequence of trying to impose copyrights in the information age. If you don't cut the vine off at the root, it will just keep growing back to choke us off in other ways.
I have often taken a scene out of a rented movie for educational purposes. Re-encoded that scene into divx movie clips of interest. And used them as source materials for topics of discussion. Used the matrix "battery" scene in philosophy for several reasons. Used the "Strange Days" reply scenes in censorship/reality conversations. Technically I am circumventing copyright protection, re-encoding, and electronically distributing these clips. I see that it is no different than when I used to watch the clip in class with borrowed VCR's and a rental tape. Except now the Research questions and materials I ask can be for homework.
I could be wrong, but if I remember my reading properly, you are not in violation of any law doing what you are doing. You are not broadcasting the movie to "paying customers" (which actually isnt DMCA.. that is the standard copyright by the MPAA) and I believe your rights to use parts of things for educational and non-profit are preserved under the DMCA, not eroded.
(IANAL, and its a bit of a confusing law, but thats how I remember reading it.)
Maeryk
Feminine Protection? What is that? A chartreuse flame thrower?
When drafting legislation it's critical that the drafters are forward-looking so the legislation can adapt to conditions not net concieved by the drafters, and acomodate situations of the sort Mr. Clark describes. Certainly the situation hasn't yet occurred, but then again classes are still primarily tought using print media. There are vary few classes for which the purchase of a text book is not required. Consider for a moment, a situation where the materials for a course are distributed as an ISO image of a DVD-ROM containing all the published works to be utilized in the class (an englsih class for example). Consider that one of the works is a clip from a movie adaptation of one of those publsihed works. The TEACH Act clearly states that a license is not required for usage for academic purposes, yet it is illegal to distribute, aquire or use the circumvention tools needed for implementation of the fair use exceptions spelled out in the TEACH act.
Organizations such as the MPAA have the stated position that copyright should be absolute in nature, indefinate in durration and that fair use does not exist. Clearly, the TEACH act is in direct conflict with this position, but instead of stepping up to work within the law, the Motion Picture Association of America chooses to bend the law, then have it re-written to accomodate it's whims.
Clearly, by implication of the TEACH Act, circumvention tools are in fact not only legal to develop, distribute and use, but encouraged. This is good news for all who wish to see the creative works of the past preserves in accessible forms for future generations.
--CTH
--Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
Copying brief excerpts of material for educational use should be okay, but copying entire works should not be. If it were, there'd be no incentive to create educational works (i.e. those primarily or only intented to be used by educators, like textbooks), since nobody would pay for them.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
And I hope the DMCA wins every battle. Only when people realize how absurd the law is will the force to repeal it be strong enough. It's like civil liberties. If Ashcroft tried to take them all away at once the opposition would be too strong, but if he does it slower then people won't notice it as strongly. If the DMCA slowly defeats logic it could win, but if it is absurdly clear how illogical it is then perhaps it can be repealed.
Of course, this is the philosophy Ralph Nader used in the 2000 election, so I could be wrong...
A more recently passed law says "X is permitted". This overrides the earlier one which said "X is prohibited". This is distinctly stronger than discussions about possibly overriding the prohibition.
TEACH says "X is permitted".
DMCA says "Doing Y in order to get X is prohibited".
Think of placing a piece of information in a locked box. The issue is that TEACH allows them to use the information for their classes, but DMCA says they are not allowed to unlock the box.
Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
Some of us would like to be able to play DVDs on Linux legally. Thats fair use last time I checked.
A better summation is would be: when we feel the law is unjust, we commit acts of civil disobedience.
Free Mac Mini. Yes, I'm
If I buy a book with a lock on it I have a right to pick/break/remove that lock to access the contents of the book. I do not require a key from the publisher nor their consent to read the book under the stipulation that I must possess the original key. Even if I have a Xerox machine next to me. Just because I have the ability duplicate the work does not permit them to dictate how I can access it.
I don't want knowledge. I want certainty. - Law, David Bowie
Actualy i think in this case the DMCA would say they are not allowed to pick the lock. Because if they get permission from the copyhold and are given the key, they can unlock the box legally. :)