[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] EFF: Court Endorses Ban on DVD Copy Technology [321 Studios]
Remember the DVDCCA argument is that the purchaser of the DVD does NOT have the
authority of the copyright holder to view it. The authority of the copyright is
granted to the DVD maker who graciously grants it to the purchaser of the DVD.
The DVDCCA can revoke the authority of the copyright in future DVDs as a
sanction against the rogue DVD manufacturer. That's the DVDCCA argument. One
that I'd bet money Judge Kaplan either assisted in the formulation or was aware
of it at the lawfirm where he was in the intellectual property department (see
This is the nonsensical legal theory that has been espoused. The issue is if
the authority of the copyright holder is conveyed on the purchase of the
copyrighted material or not. If not, then I doubt seriously that the legal or
political communities has considered the consequences.
On 27 Feb 2004 at 14:44, Jeme A Brelin wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 14:44:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeme A Brelin <email@example.com>
To: Openlaw DMCA Forum <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] EFF: Court Endorses Ban on DVD Copy Technology
Send reply to: email@example.com
> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Ole Craig wrote:
> > The opinion cites Corley (272 F.3d at 444) and says "This Court
> > agrees with the Corley court that the purchase of a DVD does not give to
> > the purchaser the authority of the copyright holder to decrypt CSS."
> > Does the court still not realize that decryption is necessary in
> > order to view?
> > A. I have purchased a DVD.
> The court has only commented on THAT condition.
> > B. I have purchased licensed DVD player hardware.
> Licensed by whom and how? I don't think my computer's DVD player carries
> a DVDCCA license... but I'm not certain.
> > C. I have signed no license agreement with the DVDCCA.
> And neither has the copyright holder, if you recall. Remember the DVD
> mastering form that was posted here a couple of years ago? There was a
> checkbox for CSS scrambling, but no comment on how that enters you into a
> contract with the decoder manufacturers or anyone else (i.e., no chain of
> > D. In order to view the content on the DVD, it must somehow be
> > decrypted.
> > Decryption does not occur magically; it is performed by my computer at
> > my instruction. The computer is a proxy for my action, not an actor
> > itself. If, as the court opines, the combination of (A & B) does not
> > confer *upon me* the "authority of the copyright holder" which is
> > required to decrypt, and furthermore given (C); how am I legally clear
> > of the DMCA when (D) occurs as I play my DVD?
> Where doe sthe court mention B? Did I miss that?
> Jeme A Brelin
> [cc] counter-copyright