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

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

"Bill Garber" <willy46pa@comcast.net> wrote in message
57ydnRn92qaOGj-iRVn-vw@comcast.com">news:57ydnRn92qaOGj-iRVn-vw@comcast.com...
>
> "Frank Townsend" <ftownsen@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:Pivob.38141$AU.30372@nwrddc01.gnilink.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"
>
> You have taken this clear out of context.

In this instance, the sentence does not appear to be limited by its context.

> Yes, they do forbid the act
> of circumvention merely to gain access to copy controlled software.

Where in the DMCA do you see a section that prohibits circumvention of copy
controls?

There is a distinction between circumventing controls that limit access and
those that prevent copying.  The new rule allows circumvention of controls
in certain instances that would otherwise prevent access, but does not
address copy controls.

> > See:  http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/librarian_statement_01.html
>
> The entire statement is simply extending a ruling from the past that does
> allow the circumvention of copy controls on certain types of media which
> would prevent libraries and the blind from accessing material that is now
> in effect obsolete.

No  The new rule allows circumvention of _access_ controls not copy
controls.  And the "obsolete" refers to formats and dongles, not the
material itself.


Frank