DMCA Exemptions Don't Matter

sbma44 followed up to the recent news that jailbreaking iPhones is now legal with an article about DMCA exemptions. He says "The American Prospect has an article up that argues that focus on specific DMCA exemptions is silly, the practical upshot is about zero, and the underlying law remains as rotten as ever."

Comments

Re:Screw CSS

[metiscus]

The author is arguing that the DMCA legislates to private citizens the disallowed behaviors that they have with technology devices that they have purchased themselves which may be necessary to simply use the device. The author disagrees with the premise that there should be laws that dictate to private citizens what they can do with their own technology. The final line in the article sums that point up pretty well:

"The exemptions are fine; they hardly matter. It's the fact that we need them at all that's the problem."

Re:Much More To The Point

[sconeu]

You sue for false advertising... "Own it Today!!!"

Re:There is a practical upshot

[AndersOSU]

Um, no.

While you have a right to jailbreak your phone, or break CSS on your movie (for certain purposes), it is not clear that you have the right to distribute tools to allow others to do the same. If you do this openly you might ultimately prevail in court, but you should definitely plan on being sued, because this issue has not been settled.

Re:Screw CSS

[Anonymous Coward]

They can still structure their warranties such that if anything else goes wrong with the phone you're SOL if it's SIM-unlocked or jailbroken

People keep saying this, but in practice, doing so would turn into a Magnuson Moss class action faster than you can say "What warranty terms?"

Re:Screw CSS

[AndersOSU]

Unless you're putting together movie clips for commentary, you're still not allowed to break CSS. The library of Congress didn't say you're allowed to break DRM for any fair-use purpose, they said you can break it in order to accomplish the following activities

the incorporation of short portions of motion pictures into new works for the purpose of criticism or comment, and where the person engaging in circumvention believes and has reasonable grounds for believing that circumvention is necessary to fulfill the purpose of the use in the following instances:

        (i) Educational uses by college and university professors and by college and university film and media studies students;
        (ii) Documentary filmmaking;
        (iii) Noncommercial videos.

You'll note that backing up your movies or shifting the media of your movies is conspicuously absent.

Re:Screw CSS

[icebraining]

shielding service providers from responsibility of their users infringement was a pretty good idea.

Yes, but not being punished for sending fake DMCA takedown notices is bad.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100323/1915138686.shtml