Re: [dvd-discuss] Music biz wants tougher DMCA, CPRM 2 to protectcopyright

["Doug Hudson" <patentbuster(at)home.com>]

There's a terrific flaw in the DMCA that could cause a "copyright misuse"
problem for the Industry.  There is a sudden energy in seeking an antritrust
exemption in the DMCA II that just died in Congress.

Here's the reader's digest version:

(1) Assume market power.  Its the MPAA after all.
(2) DMCA does not change or limit substantive copyright law (17 USC s
1201(c)(1)) [DMCA doesn't excuse copyright misuse]
(3) Access controls exist which do not bar fair uses, backups under 17 USC
ss 107, 114, etc
(4) Principals of Industry have publically stated goal to end fair use,
limit uses to those permitted by selves [intent to monopolize]
(5) Industry access controls employ 'perfect controls' far beyond the
protections of 17 USC s 106:
    (a) private distribution, private performance, and private display are
restricted (these are not rights of the copyright holder)
    (b) all uses under 17 USC s 107 (fair use) are barred with force of law
(1201 circumvention)

As a result, Industry has unnecessarily barred all uses, not just those
protected by copyright law, only to (admittedly) extend its monopoly power
over copyrighted works far beyond what the statute permits.  This may (a)
render the underlying copyrights in the works unenforceable, or more likely
(b) it would render any access rights under 1201(a) or (b) unenforceable.

-dh

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Zulauf" <johnzu@ia.nsc.com>
To: <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Music biz wants tougher DMCA, CPRM 2 to
protectcopyright


> They only thing that will stop this is when the copyright industry
> understands that this sort of behavior is not in their best interests.
> Large legal liability exposure might be a really  goo place to start.
> Make sure that not only the media companies, but their technology
> "collaborators" feel the heat**.
>
> I really think we should consider "abuse of copyright" "collusion"
> "price-fixing" "consumer rights/consumer fraud" class action against
> these guys.  I wrote a (admittedly very flawed and non-legally savvy)
> proposal for a class action suit on the Twiki -- it's broken but it has
> an "edit" button on the bottom of each page.
>
> Dean Sanchez wrote:
> >
> > They're at it again.  It's obvious that the industry believes that
> > citizens should only have the 'rights' that the industry is willing to
> > grant.
> >
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/22087.html
>
>
> .002
>
> ** I'm involved with a streaming content standards organizations, and
> when I bring up to them the potential for legal liability in
> creating/support TPM's (for example the current case against the CD
> anti-copy technology, or some ADA challenge -- it get their attention.
> A big lawsuit against the SMDI, CPRM, 3C, 4C, 5C bodies would be enough
> to make the rest of the industry far more circumspect about
> colloboration I think.
>
>