Re: [dvd-discuss] Fair use is a balance?

[Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org]

Quite right. The issue is not how digital rights managment allows them to 
keep the same rights but without the proper safeguards (as John Z, and 
Jeme and a few others have pointed out) allows them capabilities outside 
those rights (repudiation). 

I think Prof. Litman has the right idea. The issue here is not how to keep 
what we have. the issue is now what do we need to go back to striking a 
balance between the technology we have and the copyright system. Creating 
a technological totalitarian state dedicated to the preservation of 
intellectual property rights is one way to go happily into extinction but 
not one that I would recommend.




Scott A Crosby <crosby@qwes.math.cmu.edu>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
09/24/01 08:31 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     Bryan Taylor <bryan_w_taylor@yahoo.com>
        cc:     <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
        Subject:        [dvd-discuss] Fair use is a balance?


On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Bryan Taylor wrote:

>
> Because fair use is the balancing of copyright vs first amendment
> rights, it isn't simply a policy decision. Broadcasting's public
>

Actually, reading this again this time, this sentance twigged me.

Is 'Fair use' a 'balance' at all?

Isn't Fair use is the doctrine that keeps the copyright act
constitutional, without that doctrine, the copyright act would violate the
first amendment and be unconstitutional?

That would mean that any erosion of fair use must automatically infringe
the first amendment... IMHO, we need to be cautious about the debate
luring us toward quicksand of their choosing.

Once the argument goes from 'Digital control will let us obtain the most
money and extract the greatest control over the users of the works we own'
to 'Digital rights management will allow us to manage, digitally, the same
rights we've always enjoyed', we've lost the battle.  Noone will accept
with the first, but I would have once accepted the second.

Scott