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."
A group representing college media centers is warning the
U.S. Copyright Office about a possible conflict between two federal
laws, one meant to limit electronic access to copyrighted material and
the other designed to broaden access to the same material for online
education.
At issue are the Technology Education and Copyright
Harmonization Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The first
measure is known as the Teach Act and was signed into law in November.
It amended copyright law to allow college instructors to use
nondramatic works, such as news articles and novels, and portions of
dramatic works, such as movies, in online courses without paying fees
and without seeking the copyright holder's permission.
The second law, which took effect in 1998, has a section that
makes it illegal to bypass technologies that block access to
copyrighted material. In a letter sent last month to the Copyright
Office, the Consortium of College and University Media Centers says it
wants clarification of that section of the digital-copyright law, known
as the anti-circumvention provision.
What worries the media centers is that colleges might not be
allowed to bypass copying protections even when they need to do so to
use materials from CDs and DVDs for distance education, as permitted by
the Teach Act in certain circumstances. The problem arises when digital
materials are not also released in non-digital formats that the
colleges can fall back on, such as print.
The group represents 312 college media centers, many of which are responsible for helping faculty members create online courses.
The group's letter was among dozens sent to the copyright
office. It is considering exceptions to the anti-circumvention
provision, as it is legally required to do every three years.
Noting that colleges have barely begun to apply the provisions ...
of the Teach Act, the group says that given the law's "great promise
and its expected wholesale adoption by nonprofit higher education
we cannot wait another three years to deal with the impact of this
conflict after the fact."
Jeff Clark, the chairman of the college media group's
government regulations and public-policy committee, wrote the letter.
He says he knows of no specific cases in which colleges have felt
constrained from taking advantage of the Teach Act because of the
anti-circumvention provision.
"It was more a proactive measure," he says.
Allan R. Adler, vice president for legal and governmental
affairs for the Association of American Publishers, which helped draft
the Teach Act, says the kind of conflict that Mr. Clark's letter
describes would be "very rare." Publishers of books and journals almost
always have analog versions of digital material. Those that do not
often market digital material specifically for educational purposes, he
says.
Later this year, the Copyright Office is expected to reveal
its opinions on the comments it has received during hearings on the
issue.
How many "one of the strongest test" will we need to go against DMCA ?
The hearing is copyrighted so if you accidently hear it, your ears will have to be removed as it is away to circumvent non-hearing.
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?
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.
The Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act This site gives a bit more background into why it was considered necessary, as well as examples of how it is to be implemented.
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.
Young man, ....
Don't you pirate those warez,
I said Young man,
The industry cares,
It's funt to comply with...
THE D-M-C-A!
You think that I'm crazy, you should see this guy!
Since we all know what the DMCA is, would be to have a link or two to the TEACH act for those of us who dont know what its about
The house...
www.ala.org/washoff/teach.html
Couldnt find a good senate one... but thats a start
moo.
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!
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.
Lessee....
Pro-market Administration: Check.
Mostly conservative Supreme Court: Check.
Decreased interest in public works by the public: Check.
Right wing propaganda machine: Check
Bookoo gajillions of greenbacks going into politicians pockets in favor of DMCA: Check.
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
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
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.
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
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?
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...
So they already got the Teachers! I hope the DMCA Cops go after the Librarians next. Those copyright-flouting socialistic liberal peaceniks have it coming, indisriminately sharing out media to people and not charging! Haven't they read Ayn Rand? Don't they know that's against The Free Market? Shame on them! Shame on them!
Da Blog
Some of us would like to be able to play DVDs on Linux legally. Thats fair use last time I checked.
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