Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DMCA Exemption Time

Posted by kdawson on from the circumvent-with-daring-and-whimsy dept.

jvillain writes "Contentagenda notes that the Copyright Office is taking submissions for exemptions to the DMCA. They do this every three years. There's a description of the six exemptions made last time to give you some ideas. So fire up the keyboard and let the Copyright Office know what needs to be changed. If you don't get in now, it'll be another three years before you can try again."

12 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. I love how... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... the exemptions are temporary but the law is permanent.

    1. Re:I love how... by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Until someone decides to invalidate the law.

      Just keep copyright bound to a person and not to a company. And let the copyright be valid only 5 years after the death of that person to let it be able to cover for funeral costs in case that's needed.

      For computer software there should only be copyright if there is support for the software.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:I love how... by WinPimp2K · · Score: 5, Insightful

      " It's not the government's place to encourage creativity"

      Umm.. better re-read the little phrase in the Constitution that authorizes copyrights and patents. You know, the bit about promoting progress in the useful arts and sciences. It explicitly is the govenrment's place to encourage creativity. It's a pity that the govenrment seems to limit said encouragement to creative accounting practices nowadays.

      Perhaps you meant it is not the government's place to discourage mindless banal entertainments?

      --

      You either believe in rational thought or you don't
    3. Re:I love how... by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not the government's place to encourage creativity.

      That's the entire point of copyright laws. The NATURAL order of things would be that anybody can copy anything they want. That's the way society worked for generations. If Ugg stole Zar's spear or hatchet they were gonna fight. If Ugg saw Zar using them, and decided to go out and grab some rocks and sticks and make his own spear or hatchet, then nobody gave a damn. Under that natural system there would be no "owners" of ideas. If you could create or duplicate of any item that another person possessed or invented using your own physical resources, then all was well. Copyright was established in order to grant creators a limited monopoly during which to profit from their works in order to . . . encourage creativity.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  2. Within a single device... by grimJester · · Score: 4, Insightful

    An exemption should be made for copying within a single device (HD to RAM, for example) or between devices owned by the same person. If I can wish for anything here, make an exemption for any copying without distribution.

  3. Fair Use by tm2b · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It would be really nice if there were a broad exemption with something about Fair Use of content by media's purchasers. But I wouldn't expect that to come from the FCC but instead a court, since Fair Use arose from Common Law.

    --
    "It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
  4. DRM Music where 'Managing Server' is Gone by Luthair · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With a number of well known brands closing their DRM servers (Walmart, Yahoo!), it ought to be legal to remove the DRM from the audio tracks which they sold. (Really, it ought to be mandatory for the company to do it.)

    1. Re:DRM Music where 'Managing Server' is Gone by aurispector · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is the only comment I've read so far with a reasonable idea for submission. Anything that had DRM that depends on an outside source should automatically be fair game if they shut down the servers. Movies and video games included. What happens if Steam goes belly up?

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
  5. Definitely need a tougher exception for Spore by 91degrees · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's already an exception for computer software which is no longer supported. I think we need an exception for computer software that requires a potentially expensive phone call to activate. Needs a better argument than EA are idiots though. Having to call and explain why you've installed 3 times already doesn't sound such an onerous task until you have to actually do it.

  6. Re:Since the Summary Is Poor. . . by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    7. Any encrypted or protected media - so the lawful user can utilise it on any one device at a time

    This would make the real purpose of the DCMA pointless but make the stated purpose still valid ...

    --
    Puteulanus fenestra mortis
  7. Re:Why Only fitness of purpose? by EzInKy · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Guess that depends on what you mean by "full access"? One could argue that if it meets it's primary purpose. e.g. Cars go from point A to point B, CD players play music, DVD players play video, etc. Then reasonable access has been provided. The fact that you can use all of the above to cause blunt force damage to others shouldn't be enshrined into law.

    I can take my car apart piece by piece if I wanted to and reassemble it to my liking without breaking any laws. Why? Because my car is my property. Having "reasonable access" to something is no where even close to being the same as owning something.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  8. A narrow example of fair use, maybe? by msouth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    (Sorry if this is redundant, I haven't had time to read submissions yet. I'm evil! Downmod me!)

    Something like "Any material which has been legitimately purchased, where the purpose is to view/hear/otherwise use said material."

    Another one:

    Copying for personal backup, not to be redistributed. If they redistribute the copy, or even just carelessly allow an unencrypted version of something previously encrypted to go into the wild, they would be exposed to the full consequences of the DMCA, say.

    --
    Liberty uber alles.