[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] DMCA tentacles extend to garage door opener
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] DMCA tentacles extend to garage door opener
- From: mickey <mickeym(at)mindspring.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 14:41:04 -0500
- References: <A3E578CA-27F3-11D7-BD6E-003065F24232@ponymail.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204
Jeremy Erwin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, January 14, 2003, at 01:31 PM, James S. Tyre wrote:
>
>> http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030113_chamberlain_v_skylink_complaint.pdf
>> complaint in The Chamberlain Group v. Skylink Technologies, where the
>> maker of a "universal garage door opener" gets sued for DMCA
>> violation (and other things).
>>
>> http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/20030113_chamerlain_v_skylink_motion.pdf
>> Motion for summary judgment on the DMCA cause, brought by The
>> Chamberlain Group.
>>
>> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/archives/000253.html
>> Preliminary comments by Ed Felten.
>>
>
> Maybe someday all those lock/key/break-in analogies will be germane.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
Although they are claiming a TPM that controls access to a copyrighted
work, what appears to be claimed here is a TPM that controls access to a
_function_ performed by the copyrighted work. Seems very similar to the
Lexmark assertion.
1201 was supposed to control copying, yet interoperability is what it is
being controlled.
mickeym