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."
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?
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.
The end results are the same. Law, or no law, it's not going to stop this educator.
Many educators I know (Elementary school teachers, so take that into account) honestly beleive they are completely immune from copyright law because they are educators.
I routinely hear of a teacher buying or borrowing a book and then copying that book in its entirety on a xerox machine, and then distributing copies to students or other teachers. When asked about it, the response is invariably the same. "Oh, it's okay. I'm a teacher."
Personally, I think this is the way it *should* be, even if this practice falls well outside fair use. As a matter of fact, this same mentality will help this situation come about. After all, if enough people believe it's okay, general consensus will eventually trump legislation.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Final version, as found on copyright.gov.
This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
Yeesh, what a hackneyed misuse of an already overworked phrase. A litmus test, in common parlance, is some issue used to put something into one category or another, just like a real litmus test determines whether a substance has acid or base ph. One example would be a Supreme Court nominee's opinion on abortion used as a determiner as to whether they are conservative or liberal. You could call this a stress test, I suppose, but hardly a litmus test.
Sorry to get picky, but sometimes sloppy diction gets my hackles up...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
I beleive that TEACH is inherently flawed, in that it really doesn't give any incentives to the original creators of the copyrighted materials. Afterall, why should a teacher be allowed to copy a scene from a movie and I can't. HOWEVER, I feel that the DMCA is lawful rape of the consumer, and I personally support any peice of legislation that weekens it. After all, it assumes that all people are criminals until proven otherwise. I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE A BACKUP, since your shity cds will inevitabley SCRATCH!
YOU SUCK BALLS!
After the Mickey Mouse Protection Act, I doubt 7 of 9 will be striking this down. Argh!
All hope left is for them to step down and be replaced.
Or that the law makers come to their senses.
Or that the rest of the World replace the Berne Convention.
Argh!
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
There is a problem with this. The DMCA is just a symptom of trying to impose copyrights in the information age. If we don't get to the source of the problem, copyrights, we will forever be providing a revenue stream to those determined to impose controll over all information we use.
You're kidding, right? You're not that naive, are you? The DMCA benefits NOBODY but the **AA. All it does is criminalize the digitization of media currently produced, which means that companies represented by **AA don't have to modify their business plans
No, Im not. It also protects content not owned by the MPAA and the RIAA. Keep that in mind. Also keep in mind, that in a "perfect world" no-one would be all pissed, because NO ONE WOULD BE PIRATING THIS STUFF!.
The DMCA was passed to put the US in compliance with the WIPO treaties. These treaties were created expressly to combat the use of digital technologies that threaten current big business.
Please provide me with an example (either real or theoretical) where anyone else needs or could use the DMCA instead of the remaining existing copyright law.
You answer your own question there. It was to put us in complaince.. regular old US copyright law for a couple of reasons didnt meet "international" criteria. (dont get me started on how I dont care if it did or not).
Basically, the majority of the people I see bitching about the DMCA are those who want to freely pirate and rip media. Now, fair use aside, my suggestion to them is A) pay for what they want, or B) shut the hell up.
I agree fair use needs some work.. but then again, "fair use" is confusing in and of itself. If a school wants to use clips of "gangs of new york" to illustrate points during a class on the history of the bowery, etc, more power to em. Fair Use as far as I'm concerned. However, if it wants to play that movie in the auditorium, and charge students 2 bucks a head to see it, that is _not_ fair use. So saying "schools are paying to use it" is not clear enough.
Maeryk
Feminine Protection? What is that? A chartreuse flame thrower?
Not necessarily Linux. Much more likely the "open source" concept. There are sections in law that allow open source projects to export strong encryption outside the United States, for example.
I'm sure the dept of Homeland Security would simply love to wipe that section out, and what better way to do it than use existing, nonconflicting law?
What's this Submit thingy do?