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."

Comments

How many...

[LePrince]

How many "one of the strongest test" will we need to go against DMCA ?

to bad ..

[Jonny Ringo]

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.

What's new?

[pc486]

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?

Re:What's new?

[ParticleGirl]

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.

Re:What's new?

[Shagg]

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.

Why the hell is this "a bruhaha showdown"?

[||Deech||]

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?

More about the teach act

[Palos]

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.

Oh I don't know about that...

[Angry White Guy]

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!

What would be nice

[mesach]

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

Lawless Teacher

[A Swing Dancing Dork]

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.

Re:Lawless Teacher

[davebarz]

Actually, Departments at my school, Vanderbilt University, are forced to pay in the THOUSANDS to show a movie to a classroom or provide to the class a chapter of a book. I'm not sure about the legality of taking clips, but I know we are currently paying to do so.

Re:Lawless Teacher

[Speed Racer]

A better summation is would be: when we feel the law is unjust, we commit acts of civil disobedience.

Re:Lawless Teacher

[Olinator]

Blockpoth the quoster:

[...] Technically I am circumventing copyright protection [...]

I could be wrong, but if I remember my reading properly, you are not in violation of any law doing what you are doing. [...]

In fact, technically that is breaking the law, and it's the reason we get all worked up about it. The DMCA makes it a crime to "[...] circumvent a technical protection measure that [...] protects a copyrighted work". Nowhere does the DMCA say that the crime occurs only when the subsequent use of the work would constitute copyright infringement. (It does make a limited exception for enumerated classes of works; such enumeration is the province of the Librarian of Congress, and so far that office has not granted many exceptions. DVDs are definitely not within the exception to date.)

"But what about Fair Use?"

Fair use is a defense only to an accusation of copyright infringement. Since infringement doesn't have to be alleged in a DMCA case, you never get to raise the issue of fair use.

IANAL either, but I have spent an enormous amount of time discussing this on the DVD-discuss list.

Ole

Educators and Copyright

[Bonker]

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.

Re:Educators and Copyright

[ParticleGirl]

Educators and Copyright (Score:2)
by Bonker (243350) on 15:09 Tuesday 25 March 2003 (#5593550)
(http://www.furinkan.net/)
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."

But educators are exempt from copyright laws in many ways that common folk are. There are four factors outlined in Section 107 of the copyright law that determine fair use for educators:

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes.

The nature of the copyrighted work.

The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.

The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.


So it's essentially a "good faith" doctrine: is the copied portion brief? Is this use of the work likely to threaten its market potential? Is your intent to avoid paying for copyrighted materials?

Educators definitely have rights and privilages outside of mere mortals. They do not have blank checks or blanket protection-- but they certainly are exempt in many ways. If that was the last copy of an out-of-print or hard to find book, or a book that those other educators or students would otherwise not be able to obtain (ie, cost prohibitive) and their copies would not be further distributed (here, we re-collect and/or destroy copies like that once we're done with them) then it is fine.

PLEASE, cut the vine off at the root!

[argoff]

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.

Re:Only for educators. . .

[Maeryk]

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

Bear in mind.. the DMCA was passed, not as an enforcement tool for the RIAA and MPAA, but as protection for virtually all vendors of copyrighted material, and producers of commercial products that dont fall under patent or copyright areas.

The use of it as a strongarm tactic is just a by-product of what was intended to be (and should be, basically) a just and good law. But like many things, it was worded too vaguely, and unfortunately, the number of lawyers who are willing to work for nearly nothing to challenge these things is small (but dedicated and laudible) compared to the number who smell blood in the water and are on corporate retainers.

Maeryk

Taking bets: Public good vs. Moneyed interests

[revscat]

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.

Huh?

[TopShelf]

"one of the strongest litmus tests"

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...

With this Supreme Court?

[GQuon]

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!

Best solution - civil disobedience

[argoff]

...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.

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.

Re:Oh, Come ON!!

[Maeryk]

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