[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] DMCA Rulemaking issued - 4 exemptions
- To: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] DMCA Rulemaking issued - 4 exemptions
- From: Ken Arromdee <arromdee(at)rahul.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 14:39:52 -0800 (PST)
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
Well, that's worthless. Let's see...
-- They're still refusing to define a class of works in a reasonable way, which
killed a huge number of reasonable exemptions.
-- They *still* don't seem to understand how CSS-encrypted works are tied to
UOP and region code restrictions, and in particular they don't seem to
understand that the motion picture industry claims that using a modified DVD
player is an unauthorized access (which means the user cannot, as the
Librarian claims, modify the player to get around the restrictions).
-- They're still saying that if the user has any way to access the work, they
can't provide an exemption, so the fact that you can play an out of region
DVD 5 times and then throw away the DVD player is enough reason to deny an
And I'm just wondering what is necessary to provide "details". Apparently,
if I claim that access controls prevent the playing of unauthorized software
on game machines, and give an example of the software and game machine
(Xbox Linux--and yes, that was mine--I was one of the few individuals to send
in a non-form-letter comment), that's not enough detail! I also gave examples
of foreign games with material that doesn't exist on domestic games; apparently
that's not enough detail either.