The Argument for Crackable Media

rubberbando writes "Wired is running a story about how the US Copyright Office is looking for input about a law that will allow some media to be legally cracked. This is aimed at certain uses such as cracking an ebook so that a blind person can use reading software with it and older software that requires a hardware dongle that no longer works." From the article: "The DMCA forbids cracking of copy-protected or encrypted digital media, with certain exceptions. When the law was passed, Congress mandated the register of copyrights revisit the anti-circumvention section every three years to make sure consumers have proper access to materials they purchased -- even if content creators have them locked down. If the copyright office finds instances where copy protection prevents fair use of the work, then those copy protections can be legally circumvented." We reported on the other side of the coin yesterday.

Comments

Re:way to go

[BottleCup]

you are doing heck of a jog,us copyright office

hopefully all that excercise will help it lose some weight ;)

Re:Fair Use?

[Arker]

So, for example, back in the 19th century, the government seized land, gave it to railroad companies so that they could put privately owned tracks on it

Yes, that was the beginning of corporate welfare. Also of the era of the 'robber baron' and the monopolist. And this is your defense?

These are forced sales, but they're not robberies.

A distinction without a difference.

If I pull a gun on you and demand you 'give' me your wallet, I'm mugging you, not soliciting donations.

And if I pull a gun on you and demand you fork over your wallet in exchange for something else, anything else, that's still a mugging, not a sale.

The essential difference between robbery and sale is coërcion. When you are forced to sell, that's not really a sale, it's just a robbery with a dress and some makeup on.