Slashdot Mirror
Feds Say Hacking DRM To Fix Your Electronics Is Legal (vice.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: The Librarian of Congress and U.S. Copyright Office just proposed new rules that will give consumers and independent repair experts wide latitude to legally hack embedded software on their devices in order to repair or maintain them. This exemption to copyright law will apply to smartphones, tractors, cars, smart home appliances, and many other devices. The move is a landmark win for the "right to repair" movement; essentially, the federal government has ruled that consumers and repair professionals have the right to legally hack the firmware of "lawfully acquired" devices for the "maintenance" and "repair" of that device. Previously, it was legal to hack tractor firmware for the purposes of repair; it is now legal to hack many consumer electronics.
Specifically, it allows breaking digital rights management (DRM) and embedded software locks for "the maintenance of a device or system in order to make it work in accordance with its original specifications" or for "the repair of a device or system to a state of working in accordance with its original specifications." New copyright rules are released once every three years by the U.S. Copyright Office and are officially put into place by the Librarian of Congress. These are considered "exemptions" to section 1201 of U.S. copyright law, and makes DRM circumvention legal in certain specific cases. The new repair exemption is broad, applies to a wide variety of devices (an exemption in 2015 applied only to tractors and farm equipment, for example), and makes clear that the federal government believes you should be legally allowed to fix the things you own.
Specifically, it allows breaking digital rights management (DRM) and embedded software locks for "the maintenance of a device or system in order to make it work in accordance with its original specifications" or for "the repair of a device or system to a state of working in accordance with its original specifications." New copyright rules are released once every three years by the U.S. Copyright Office and are officially put into place by the Librarian of Congress. These are considered "exemptions" to section 1201 of U.S. copyright law, and makes DRM circumvention legal in certain specific cases. The new repair exemption is broad, applies to a wide variety of devices (an exemption in 2015 applied only to tractors and farm equipment, for example), and makes clear that the federal government believes you should be legally allowed to fix the things you own.
... you can bet companies will still fight tooth and nail to get around this shit. Just like now game companies can take advantage of mass public ignorance and high speed internet to legally reclassify all new games as "services". Just as with the new Assasins creed because they control the software from the point of production and their customers are 100's of miles away.
https://www.dailydot.com/layer...
The final ruling document isn't due to publish until tomorrow, but here is the 2018 exemptions ruling:
(PDF warning)
https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2018-23241.pdf
Scroll down to page 19
#8 Video games requiring server communication - for continued individual play and
preservation of games by libraries, archives, and museums
applies to discontinued game servers
Page 52 has some other limited uses of stripping drm on games specifically for preservation by a limited class.
Likely won't apply to you and I, but would to the internet archive for instance.
Basically pages 15-20 detail the various software exemptions but not games related.
No, technically a patent violation claim can be made any time you make, use, sell, or offer to sell the product without the patent holder's permission (often in the form of an authorization or license).
True, but if you don't cause the patent holder any verifiable financial damages what can they sue you for? If you are just using it personally, from a device you built yourself, how does that damage them? You didn't buy the device from a licensed manufacturer and denied them the royalties?
Civil law is pretty clear, actual damages is all you get to collect. Punitive damages are only for outrageous behavior, which if you where only using the patent for personal use, is unlikely to be considered outrageous.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101