Slashdot Mirror


ECA Plans Games-Related DMCA Showdown

Gamespot is reporting that the Electronic Consumers Association (ECA) has picked its first legal fight since vowing to step up lobbying efforts. The organization is going head-to-head with the Electronic Software Association (ESA), a long-time backer of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), by coming out in favor of H.R. 1201 (also known as the Fair Use Act of 2007). "If it became law, the Fair Use Act would create a variety of exemptions to the DMCA's prohibitions on circumventing anti-piracy measures. The Fair Use Act would make it legal to bypass anti-piracy measures in a handful of situations, for personal archiving; for researching, critiquing, or reporting on works of substantial public interest (if that is the sole reason for the circumvention); or to skip commercial or personally objectionable content. It would also create an exemption in copyright law for people who make and distribute equipment used to bypass copyright protection (like modchips), provided the device 'is capable of substantial, commercially significant non-infringing use.'"

6 of 64 comments (clear)

  1. What about business archiving? by t0qer · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ok games related stub, but i'm going to use karaoke as an example since that's what I work with.

    Karaoke fair use is a subject of hot debate between singers, KJ's (Karaoke Jocks) and karaoke manufactuers. Basically guys like me (1 man shows) are considered "commercial". Therefore fair use doesn't apply to us. This whole argument extends not just to karaoke, but music and gaming as well.

    Ok from the karaoke anti-piracy agency faq.
    http://www.karaokeantipiracyagency.com/faq.html

    Am I allowed to make a copy of my discs for archive purposes?
    This is one of the most confusing issues involving copyrighted music. It is also one of the arguments often presented by those who want to break the copyright laws. This entire issue revolves around the definition of the class of copyrighted material. By law, you are permitted to make an archive copy of "Software" class copyrighted material. However, music (including Karaoke CDGs) is part of the "Phonorecord" class of copyrighted materials. Archive copies are not permitted in this class. So, no, you may not make an archive copy of your Karaoke discs.


    Some of the most prominent karaoke companies want to see the practice of PC based karaoke outlawed. Doesn't matter if you're pirating or not.

    Now for a counterpoint from an IP lawyer.
    http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/02/22/karaoke_legal_myths/
    TRUTH: While a commercial use weighs against fair use, copyright law permits copying a CDG disc in a number of commercial circumstances. Commercial use, does not by itself, determine if it is an illegal use.

    I'm all for a new law that promotes fair use, but the one question I have in mind is will it protect guys like me. Will fair use extend to both personal and "Commerical".

  2. Wake me when something happens... by RingDev · · Score: 3, Informative

    This bill has been "Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection" for over 2 and a half years. Kudos to these guys for stepping up the lobbying, but call me when something actually happens.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:Wake me when something happens... by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2, Informative

      Bills are apparently numbered for each session of Congress.

      The 109th Congress's HR1201 AKA "Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act of 2005," a bill to alter the Federal Trade Commission Act to punish companies that mislabel copy-protected CDs, got stuck in committee.

      The 110th Congress's HR1201 AKA "Freedom And Innovation Revitalizing U.S. Entrepreneurship Act of 2007," a bill to alter Copyright Law to add fair use exemptions, is new.

      Adding to the confusion, both were proposed by Rick Boucher.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  3. Nothing for ya in this bill by RingDev · · Score: 4, Informative
    From a layman's reading, it doesn't look like there is anything for ya in this bill. This bill doesn't do anything about clarifying what is or is not fair use, it only corrects the absence of legal use exemptions from the DMCA.

    The bill has 3 primary parts. First is a requirement for retail packaging of DRM'd software (specifically music and digital books on CDs) to include a DRM warning label that identifies that the media contains a DRM security system and may not work in all players. Second is a requirement for a follow up report 2 years after the bill has been passed. And Third is the corrections to the DMCA. That part consists of:

    (a) Scientific Research- Subsections (a)(2)(A) and (b)(1)(A) of section 1201 of title 17, United States Code, are each amended by inserting after `title' in subsection (a)(2)(A) and after `thereof' in subsection (b)(1)(A) the following: `unless the person is acting solely in furtherance of scientific research into technological measures'.

                (b) Fair Use Restoration- Section 1201(c) of title 17, United States Code, is amended--

                            (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting before the period at the end the following: `and it is not a violation of this section to circumvent a technological measure in order to obtain access to the work for purposes of making noninfringing use of the work'; and

                            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

                            `(5) Except in instances of direct infringement, it shall not be a violation of the Copyright Act to manufacture or distribute a hardware or software product capable of substantial noninfringing uses.'. -Rick
    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  4. Re:DRM expiry by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative
    Maybe there is:

    What is mandatory deposit?
    Mandatory deposit (17 U.S.C. section 407) requires the owner of copyright or of the exclusive right of distribution to deposit in the U.S. Copyright Office for the use of the Library of Congress two complete copies of the best edition within 3 months after a work is published. Copies of all works under copyright protection that have been published or distributed in the United States must be deposited with the Copyright Office within 3 months of the date of first publication. (See Copyright Office Circular 7d, Mandatory Deposit of Copies or Phonorecords for the Library of Congress, and the Deposit Regulation 202.19.) Electing not to register your copyright in the work with the Copyright Office does not exempt you from the mandatory deposit provision of the law.

    We are a foreign publisher. Do we need to submit our publication to comply with the U.S. deposit requirement?
    Yes. If you distribute your work in the United States, you are subject to the deposit requirements of the United States. These requirements apply to a work that is first published in a foreign country as soon as that work is distributed in the United States through the distribution of copies that are either imported or are part of an American edition. The deposit requirement is one copy.
    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  5. Re:About time by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative

    > So, is there a fund set up yet, where all of us good, fair use minded citizens, can contribute money to pay off those lawmakers that will support this? Can we use this money to buy a lobbyist to get this to the attention of the lawmakers that we in the US actually WANT this law? Yes.
    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."