Winter '06 was actually our second crypto class for UW PMP; lectures and materials from when Josh Benaloh and I taught crypto in Winter '02 are also available on-line. The material covered in the two courses is similar (we added material on cryptanalysis in '06 and updated the existing material). If you're working through the course at home you might find it helpful to work through the '02 assignments as well.
What you've quoted above is the Bern convention's Article on "moral rights" of authors. Unfortunately, you left out Article 6(bis)(2), which reads:
(2) The determination of the conditions under which these rights shall be exercised is reserved for the national legislation of the countries of the Union. The means of redress for safeguarding these rights shall be regulated by the legislation of the country where protection is claimed.
The United States has traditionally taken a very dim view of "moral rights", primarily because the U.S. views copyrights as a legislative grant from Congress to the author, not a fundamental right. Only creators of visual art have any moral rights in the U.S., and that's only due to the passage of the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA) of 1990.
Here are a couple of links from Google to good overviews of "moral rights" in the U.S.
The XMLDSIG implementation in the.NET Framework is fully compliant with the final XMLDSIG Recommendation. (I'm a co-author of the XMLDSIG standard and my group at Microsoft owns the XMLDSIG implementation in the.NET Framework.)
The.NET Framework implementation was one of the original four to participate in interop testing at the Pittsburgh IETF (July 2000) and we tracked every change in the spec since then.
The classes implementing XMLDSIG are located in the System.Security.Cryptography.Xml namespace in the System.Security.dll assembly.
Actually, the first Federal Copyright Act (Copyright Act of May 31, 1790, 1 Stat. 124) provided for a copyright term of only 14 years. This term could be extended exactly once for another 14 years provided that the author was alive at the end of the first 14-year term and complied with all the recording, depositing and publishing requirements in the 14th year.
Renewal periods have subsequently been extended to 28 years + 14 renewal in 1831, 28 years + 28 years renewal in 1909, and life + 50 in the 1976 Act. Sonny Bono gave us life + 70.
Both of these hacks are documented in "Legends of Caltech", ISBN 2-15-000022-9, which you can get at the Caltech bookstore for $16. (There's also a second volume, "More Legends of Caltech", which I didn't think was as good as the first.) Unfortunately it looks like they only ship to on-campus addresses...
IANAL (but I know a bit about U.S. Copyright law) and it seems to me that DeCSS is similar to the sorts of technology, programs & methods that the U.S. Congress explicitly protected last year when it passed legislation enacting provisions of the WIPO Copyright Treaty dealing with CMI (Copyright Management Information) and circumvention technologies.
You may recall that as part of the treaty implementation, Congress outlawed "circumvent[ing] a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected [under U.S. Copyright laws]". (This was H.R. 2281, passed at the end of the last Congress, now Public Law 105-304.) Specifically, Congress added Sections 1201-1205 to Title 17 of the U.S. Code (the title generally dealing with copyrights). Section 1201(a)(1)(A) contains the general prohibition quoted above; it won't take effect until next year.
Much of the debate about copyright protection systems, and when it would still be legal to circumvent them, centered on interoperability and encryption research. In fact, there are carve-outs for both activities within Section 1201:
1201(f) protects circumvention for limited reverse-engineering for purposes of achieving interoperability among independent computer programs. (Before you go rushing off for DeCSS, note that 1201(f) applies only to copyright protection of computer programs; you'd still have to make the argument that DVD content is a computer program in the eyes of the law.)
1201(g) is a carve-out protecting circumvention if it is done as part of a "good faith act of encryption research." (Again, before you go rushing off, read 1201(g) and note that you have to jump through some hoops to qualify. While 1201(g) might protect the original author/researcher, it wouldn't protect users of the fruits of that research.)
Finally, perhaps some of the lawyers can comment as to the differences between this situation and the "release" of other proprietary crypto algorithms, such as RC4. Wasn't RSADSI (holding the proprietary/trade secret RC4 algorithm) in the same situation when "Alleged-RC4" was posted to the net as DVD CCA finds itself now with CSS?
Slashdot Mirror
Winter '06 was actually our second crypto class for UW PMP; lectures and materials from when Josh Benaloh and I taught crypto in Winter '02 are also available on-line. The material covered in the two courses is similar (we added material on cryptanalysis in '06 and updated the existing material). If you're working through the course at home you might find it helpful to work through the '02 assignments as well.
Here are a couple of links from Google to good overviews of "moral rights" in the U.S.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property/library/mora lprimer.html
http://www.rbs2.com/moral.htm
The classes implementing XMLDSIG are located in the System.Security.Cryptography.Xml namespace in the System.Security.dll assembly.
--bal
Sixth, based on 2000 revenues of $9.421B according to Forbes.
Yes, HP's Test and Measurement division was one of the groups spun-off to Agilent back in November '99.
--bal
Renewal periods have subsequently been extended to 28 years + 14 renewal in 1831, 28 years + 28 years renewal in 1909, and life + 50 in the 1976 Act. Sonny Bono gave us life + 70.
--bal
The canonical books on MIT hacks are The Institute for Hacks, Tomfoolery & Pranks and "Is This The Way To Baker House?" A Compendium of MIT Hacking Lore, which are both available from the MIT Press Bookstore.
--bal
You may recall that as part of the treaty implementation, Congress outlawed "circumvent[ing] a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected [under U.S. Copyright laws]". (This was H.R. 2281, passed at the end of the last Congress, now Public Law 105-304.) Specifically, Congress added Sections 1201-1205 to Title 17 of the U.S. Code (the title generally dealing with copyrights). Section 1201(a)(1)(A) contains the general prohibition quoted above; it won't take effect until next year.
Much of the debate about copyright protection systems, and when it would still be legal to circumvent them, centered on interoperability and encryption research. In fact, there are carve-outs for both activities within Section 1201:
Finally, perhaps some of the lawyers can comment as to the differences between this situation and the "release" of other proprietary crypto algorithms, such as RC4. Wasn't RSADSI (holding the proprietary/trade secret RC4 algorithm) in the same situation when "Alleged-RC4" was posted to the net as DVD CCA finds itself now with CSS?
--bal