[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Postage Meters and the "Right to Tinker"
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Postage Meters and the "Right to Tinker"
- From: "John Zulauf" <johnzu(at)ia.nsc.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 17:48:11 -0700
- References: <255195E927D0B74AB08F4DCB07181B901E555D@exchsj1.onetouch.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
Richard Hartman wrote:
> One does if it's .PDF or .LIT . . .
> So ... if RandomHouse sends me an unsolicited CD
> full of _protected_ .PDF ebooks, am I within my
> rights to make use of the Russion un-protection
> program to read them, or do you maintain that
> I have to buy a key from them to legitimately access
> my gift?
The AEPBR only work on books that were authorized (ie. they HAD the
turbotax key by analogy) to the person on a given platform. If you
weren't able to view the protected book inside the Adobe eBook view
already, it didn't do anything. This was why the case was so stupid.
So... are these eBooks authorized to one of my computers already or
not. If so, this is a Elcomsoft/DeCSS analogy in which I'm already and
authorized person. If not, this is exactly the case of the TurboTax
install (or the ill fated Adobe Font-on-Demand).
The authority to make non-fair copies comes exactly and only from the
> > Going around a security measure certainly is not "ordinary use" in any
> > case.
> ... including the case of DeCSS ...
As I've said too many times CSS isn't a security measure. It provides
no discrimination between authorized and unauthorized persons. It
assumes possession is authority. How replacing a brandX imaginary fence
with a brandY imaginary fence can be considered circumvention could only
be believed in Hollywood.