[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: GPL V3 and Linux
    On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 22:10 -0500, wrote:
    > On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:42:24 +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch said:
    > > With the exception that I *can* circumvent the protection on PDFs *if*
    > > I'm legally allowed to copy the copyrighted work (with or without the
    > > owner's permission - this is one reason for a legal copy. But there are
    > > others which cannot be inhibited by the copyright holder - which is
    > > usually not the artist).
    > Actually, in the US, it is in fact illegal to bypass a protection scheme
    > *even if the content is something you have legal rights to*.

    Well, the so-called "land of the free". SCNR .....

    > 17 USC 1201(a)(1)(A) says:
    > (A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively
    > controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained
    Actually there is similar wording here (but of course in German) used
    for the similar purpose. The problem with this kind of law is IMHO:
    -) "effectively controls access": If I (or someone else) can circumvent
    it, it is obviously not "effective".
    -) If I (and no one else) cannot circumvent it, the laws/court decisions
    as such is basically pointless because it doesn't limit or hinder
    And we have no definition (in the laws) hereover whatever "effective"
    should mean and hoe *I* can determine (which a sufficient large chance
    of getting it right) if a given protection scheme must be considered

    Don't get me wrong, I understand how it is meant what such rules should
    achieve an, but I request from lawyers (as such) that they write
    laws/court decisions down in an unambigous way (for a non-law person -
    remember that laws affect *all* people so every law and court decision
    should IMHO readable and understandable by the average citizen).

    And if they can't write it down unambigously, I actually question if we
    want to accept laws/court decisions about rules and concepts which
    cannot be even written down in a simple enough and clear way.

    > Got that? You have to apply for special permission to bypass to get data that
    > you have rights to use....

    Yes, because that is the primary goal of all of the laws in that area in
    last years: To effectively take away legal rights from you that you
    actually legally have (or better: had).

    Firmix Software GmbH
    mobil: +43 664 4416156 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
    Embedded Linux Development and Services

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-01-27 10:56    [W:0.041 / U:146.752 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site