Re: [dvd-discuss] The next step in the Balkanization ofDVD-Rmedia

["John Zulauf" <johnzu(at)ia.nsc.com>]

Ole Craig wrote:

>         Anyone have any speculations on what such "measures" could be
> incorporated into the *format*? The previous spec already contained
> preburnt CSS key areas..
> 
>         Are we missing something? (The above would appear to imply
> that, with the "DVD-R for Authoring" discs with which we're already
> familiar, it *is* possible to burn a bit-for-bit copy of a
> CSS-obfuscated disc.)
> 

The point is (and too bad this didn't emerge under discovery in 2600)
that CSS is NOT a copy protection mechanism.  Either that or these "for
authoring" drives and media (as they don't have the preburnt sectors)
*are* as much circumvention devices as DeCSS ever was, down to the fact
that they are *explicitly* marketed a devices that can write CSS encoded
disks.

A point I've often made is that DRM can never achieve total coverage, as
(a) there is (and 1A would say their can't be) a "media speech provider"
license as there is for locksmiths and (b) one cannot create the media
with devices that can right the "masters".

Is there a cause of action for 2600 if they discover the the P's have
been using these "circumvention device" (authoring drives) and thus have
unclean hands?  Better yet, is there some cause of action against the
P's attorneys who knew (or should have known) that their clients were
unclean?

Finally, since the lower Judge in Sklyarov has ruled that no scienter
clause exists in the DMCA (nor is one implied or even needed for
Constitutionality) then the fact that these devices *can* circumvent, or
constitute a component of a device that does circumvent... why haven't
the FBI raided Pioneer's import house, and arrested every visiting
engineer on the project.  The self same rationale applies.

.002