You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
4

[–] curomo 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I think DMCA already made that the law.

0
4

[–] Donbuster 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Incorrect, actually. The bypassing of DRM is not in and of itself a crime in the US. The bypassing of DRM for illegal purposes (mainly copyright infringement) however IS a crime, in addition to the actual illegal activities. From the ruling in Abbey House Media vs Apple Inc

[Simon & Schuster] and Penguin's arguments to the contrary conflate the removal of DRM protection with the infringement alleged in the counterclaims. There is no question that Abbey House encouraged the removal of DRM protection. The act of infringement underlying the inducement claim, however, is not the removal of DRM protection. Rather, it is the copying and distribution of ebooks to others after such protection has been removed. The counterclaims do not allege that Abbey House encouraged such infringing acts.

0
1

[–] go1dfish 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

DMCA actually provides pesky exceptions for things like interoperability and security research.

0
1

[–] B3bomber 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Which changes every time the Library of Congress decides it's not legal for you to use YOUR phone with any carrier you want. Those exceptions have to be constantly maintained for some stupid reason.