[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Postage Meters and the "Right to Tinker"
- To: <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Postage Meters and the "Right to Tinker"
- From: "Richard Hartman" <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:08:35 -0800
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Thread-index: AcK4yoouTgBea/EFSkyjkApmQPaEmgACEUiw
- Thread-topic: [dvd-discuss] Postage Meters and the "Right to Tinker"
I'm not so sure still ... the keystone of your
argument seems to be that I have been given a
gift of the installer, but not TurboTax itself.
TurboTax _is_ on the CD, and it is therefore
materially part of the gift.
Also, consider this recasting of the pieces:
the installer isn't an application in and of
itself ... it is the DRM controlling access to
the work (TurboTax).
All I am talking about is bypassing the
DRM (the installer) to access the work (TurboTax)
which I own (having recieved it as a gift) . . .
-Richard M. Hartman
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Zulauf [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 9:00 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Postage Meters and the "Right to Tinker"
> I'm concerned that we as a group can't keep the distinction of the
> TurboTax and DVD TPM's clear. It is this very conflation
> that allow the
> MPAA and RIAA to position DeCSS as theft. Clearly DeCSSing a DVD is a
> fair use (subsequent copying or share may or may not be fair, but the
> DeCSS clearly is). Why? The good old "four part test."
> DeCSS passes,
> cracking keyware (or shareware, or crippleware), whether
> mailed on CD or
> posted on www.downloads.com doesn't (See note 0, and below).
> Folks if we can't keep this straight, how do we expect
> congress to? And
> if Congress is confused, they'll much more likely legally protect BOTH
> rather (or the wrong one) as opposed to only right one.
> Richard Hartman wrote:
> > If it weren't for that 'gift' aspect, then I wouldn't
> > have any problems w/ the idea that hacking past the
> > DRM is theft of their product.
> The gift is a of copy (and thus the right to use) an fully functioning
> installer disk that includes most of the components of a working
> TurboTax. In the EULA and on the packaging are the terms of that
> right-to-use. Any use outside those terms is only legitimate if it
> falls under the general rubric of "fair use."
> Supplying your own authentication mechansim to bypass the installer's
> isn't a fair use of (drum roll) not the installer disk but of the
> TurboTax components on it. You own a copy of these TurboTax
> and may make any fair use of them you like (see Note 1).
> Bypassing the
> authentication method (without obtaining a right-to-use in
> order to use
> the product a tax calculator) isn't fair, because it impacts the fair
> market value of the those files.
> > For example, if I
> > made a copy of that CD and gave it to you, that would
> > be theft (although if I gave you the original, it
> > would merely be a transfer of property...)
> This is where I think you have it exactly backwards (and where this
> differs from "Die Hard"). TurboTax would only be to happy for you to
> distribute copies of their installer CD to all of your
> friends (See note
> 2). The fair market value of this give away being $0, this
> is certainly
> fair use as the market value of the installer disk certainly will not
> If you crack the authentication of the installer and make the
> copies of the TurboTax components supplied, THEN that is infringement
> (not theft, but I knew what you meant).
> (Note 0) Cracking the TurboTax installer (regardless of what
> we think of
> p-spam) clearly isn't fair use, not only locally in the impact on the
> value of retail versions of the TurboTax files, buy also
> globally on the
> impact on the market value of all tax software -- and antithetical to
> progress. Remember, every warez Photoshop copy is users
> subtracted from
> The Gimp, Ulead, or others Adobe's competitors.
> (Note 1) You could the mass produce the disk as a "one time
> pad" cipher
> keys, the way books were used in the past. You can perform
> any analysis
> or reverse engineering of the product you like. You can extract the
> "pure factual elements" of the tax tables et. al. from the data if you
> can find them. You can even try out random numbers as keys, and even
> succeed in installed the work, assuming you then uninstall the product
> without use it for your taxes. As long as your use of the installer
> disk doesn't impact the fair market value of the content, have fun!
> (Note 2) in fact an Amway like multilevel marketing scheme (chain
> letters with CD ROMs, or P2P availability) even with commissions given
> based on the distributor tree would be cheaper for TurboTax
> -- and choke
> the net. Actually if one doesn't lose sight of the pre-sale, post-sale
> dichotomy, it would be a great poster child for P2P enabled business
> Compare and contrast this with "Die Hard". If you receive an
> unsolicited copy of "Die Hard" on DVD. Any copies for
> friends use that
> $4K authoring DVD-R writer you happen to have lying around, or any P2P
> sharing of even the CSS encrypted VOB's would raise the copyright
> holders ire, not garner praise.