Re: It's legal to crack Apple II copy protection

["Frank Townsend" <ftownsen@nospam.net>]

"Matthew Russotto" <russotto@grace.speakeasy.net> wrote in message
ttednf_PYPwN9TyiRTvUqA@speakeasy.net">news:ttednf_PYPwN9TyiRTvUqA@speakeasy.net...
..snip..
>
> Here's where you get to a VERY fine point of the law.  There are two
> parts of the DMCA which forbid circumvention.  One forbids
> circumvention to obtain access.  The other forbids circumvention to
> exercise some exclusive right of the copyright holder (which would
> include copying).  The exemption covers the former but not the
> latter.  So while making the archival copy is legal, and
> circumventing the protection to obtain access is legal, circumventing
> the protection to make the archival copy is not legal.



Matthew:

I am trying to reconcile your comments with those made by the Librarian of
Congress in reference to the recently issued exceptions:

"The DMCA does not forbid the act of circumventing copy controls"


See:  http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/librarian_statement_01.html



Frank Townsend