6 ms·

IIUC, the DMCA says that if there's some technological mechanism X that's used to enforce copyright, and a tool Y that is (or can be) used to circumvent X, then

IIUC, the DMCA says that if there's some technological mechanism X that's used to enforce copyright, and a tool Y that is (or can be) used to circumvent X, then making or distributing Y is itself illegal (as opposed to the act of using Y to circumvent X, which is already illegal even without the DMCA). The DMCA then provides a notice-based method for 'taking down' online copies of Y. In this case, X is the Admiral technology. Copyright owners use it to control access to content. However, an adblocker with Admiral's domain on its blocklist is a tool Y that circumvents that.

nkkollaw 9y ago
Thanks, I understand better now. If Admiral enables paywalls, then I kind of agree with Admiral. If companies want to put paywalls, circumventing them is kind of like jumping the gate to see a concert for free. I always hit the back button, but publishers should be free to put up paywalls (no idea why they don't do it server-side, but that's another story). So, I guess the article or at least the title are a little sensationalistic?
- callalex 9y ago
  If your paywall can be circumvented by not making a single http request then the problem lies in bad software engineering, not the law. What happens if I'm on a slow connection and that request fails? Do they get to send the FBI after me since I'm suddenly a criminal?
- Nursie 9y ago
  Here's the thing - if blocking the loading of your protection script from a third-party server is all it takes to bypass your paywall, haven't you really, really screwed up? Surely it should be the other way around - the paywall doesn't let you through unless the code is accessible and gets run? I'm not going to try and claim people wouldn't be so stupid as to try to implement it this way...
  - 15155 9y ago
    > I'm not going to try and claim people wouldn't be so stupid as to try to implement it this way. They aren't stupid: they are incredibly intelligent. It was implemented this way to weaponize the DMCA, plain and simple.
    - walterstucco 9y ago
      Just move the list on a server in Iceland Game-set-match
    - Nursie 9y ago
      If it's actually to protect anything, it's dumb, as it's defeated by whitelists, filters or even poor connections...
- mod 9y ago
  > If Admiral enables paywalls, then I kind of agree with Admiral. I do and I don't. I think paywalls should be allowed to happen, but I don't think EasyList is circumventing paywalls. The companies that use EasyList might use it to circumvent a paywall, but what they do with a list of domains is up to them. If I grabbed the EasyList repo, there's no way I could use it to circumvent a paywall. Nothing in that repo carries that functionality. It's not a matter of semantics or mincing words, either.
- nkrisc 9y ago
  They shouldn't send the content before they check if the user has paid to view it. Otherwise if they send the content to anyone who requests they can't complain when I choose what does and doesn't run on my computer.
komali2 9y ago
Whew I had no idea wtf until this comment, thank you.
swang 9y ago
please show me on the doll where easylist caused copyright infringement. admiral provides some service. some people do not want it. the list is not owned by admiral and easylist does not go into the functionalclam website, nor is it a list of results to copyright material. what exactly does a text file do to violate the dmca? this is setting a dangerous precedent.
- sbarre 9y ago
  Did you understand the comment you replied to? The DMCA is not just about direct copyright infringement, but also about preventing the circumvention of technological protections for copyrighted content. No one is saying there was copyright infringement here. You can think that this is super bogus (I sure do) but make sure you understand the nature of what you're mad about. ;-)
  - walterstucco 9y ago
    Blocking a domain does not circumvent any copyrighted content distribution It's like saying that turning off TV block the distribution of GOT hence is a tool to circumvent HBO copyright
    - jasonlotito 9y ago
      The mechanism in place here is that the domain provides code that sites use to will block content if the visitor is using an ad blocker. The argument being made is that by preventing this code from running by blocking the domain, the site thinks you should have access when in reality, they don't want to serve the content up to you. As for your TV comparison, the better comparison is probably with satellite TVs, where you are just decoding signals being sent to you anyways, and if they don't want you watching those signals, they shouldn't send them to you. It's not the same, but it's far closer than your comparison. Note, I'm not backing either side with this post. Only explaining the argument so you have a clear understanding of the issue at hand. Whether you agree with it or not is immaterial, but understanding the rational is important.
  - swang 9y ago
goodplay 9y ago
What does ad-blocking have to do with copyright circumvention or copyright enforcement? The only think on that list is the domain name. I'm certain that including a name in a list does not fall under copyright (ample precedent that backs it up). In the unlikey (and unfathomable) case that it is protected under copyright, I bet it would fall under fair use. Trademark law isn't relevant to an entry in a machine database.
- danarmak 9y ago
  Admiral's domain serves software that enforces access restrictions to copyrighted content. Including their domain in an ad-blocking list is a way to circumvent the restrictions. Whether distributing a list of domain names counts as distributing "tools" or whatever the exact language of the act is, I don't know. This other subthread contains a better discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14991624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14991624
  - goodplay 9y ago
    I doubt failing to contact a server would circumvent DRM. Blocking their servers would only make their DRM scheme fail and prevent access to said copyright material. Using the DMCA to protect company's defective and flawed DRM scheme does not constitute circumvention. As such, I do not believe that DMCA's anti-circumvention laws are relevant.
    - codedokode 9y ago
      They might use a scheme that would allow access by default and block it with a script from that domain. So blocking the domain becomes a circumvention (today I finally learned how to write this word). Or that domain could be used to collect views stats for copyrighted content and make decisions based on that stats. Blocking this domain is obviously messing with copyright protection scheme which is illegal inder DMCA.
- warcher 9y ago
  I think the argument would be that, say, the New York Times wrote an article, and that article included ads for their sponsor. This third party tool is making unauthorized edits to the New York Times' copyrighted material. I'm a hardline free speech dude, but I find it difficult to justify "We changed around your copyrighted work to remove stuff we decided we don't like." If you don't like ads, pay up or go elsewhere. You do not have a right to anybody else's IP.
nkkollaw 9y ago
Oh no, now I'm confused again... :-/
earenndil 9y ago
Ahhhhh. PERFECT. It looks like the counterargument here is that easylist itself isn't used to circumvent admiral, it's only a list. Other things, like ublock, are the ones that use the list, and are actually blocking admiral.

nkkollaw 9y ago

Thanks, I understand better now. If Admiral enables paywalls, then I kind of agree with Admiral. If companies want to put paywalls, circumventing them is kind of like jumping the gate to see a concert for free. I always hit the back button, but publishers should be free to put up paywalls (no idea why they don't do it server-side, but that's another story). So, I guess the article or at least the title are a little sensationalistic?

callalex 9y ago
If your paywall can be circumvented by not making a single http request then the problem lies in bad software engineering, not the law. What happens if I'm on a slow connection and that request fails? Do they get to send the FBI after me since I'm suddenly a criminal?
Nursie 9y ago
Here's the thing - if blocking the loading of your protection script from a third-party server is all it takes to bypass your paywall, haven't you really, really screwed up? Surely it should be the other way around - the paywall doesn't let you through unless the code is accessible and gets run? I'm not going to try and claim people wouldn't be so stupid as to try to implement it this way...
- 15155 9y ago
  > I'm not going to try and claim people wouldn't be so stupid as to try to implement it this way. They aren't stupid: they are incredibly intelligent. It was implemented this way to weaponize the DMCA, plain and simple.
  - walterstucco 9y ago
    Just move the list on a server in Iceland Game-set-match
  - Nursie 9y ago
    If it's actually to protect anything, it's dumb, as it's defeated by whitelists, filters or even poor connections...
mod 9y ago
> If Admiral enables paywalls, then I kind of agree with Admiral. I do and I don't. I think paywalls should be allowed to happen, but I don't think EasyList is circumventing paywalls. The companies that use EasyList might use it to circumvent a paywall, but what they do with a list of domains is up to them. If I grabbed the EasyList repo, there's no way I could use it to circumvent a paywall. Nothing in that repo carries that functionality. It's not a matter of semantics or mincing words, either.
nkrisc 9y ago
They shouldn't send the content before they check if the user has paid to view it. Otherwise if they send the content to anyone who requests they can't complain when I choose what does and doesn't run on my computer.

komali2 9y ago

Whew I had no idea wtf until this comment, thank you.

swang 9y ago

please show me on the doll where easylist caused copyright infringement. admiral provides some service. some people do not want it. the list is not owned by admiral and easylist does not go into the functionalclam website, nor is it a list of results to copyright material. what exactly does a text file do to violate the dmca? this is setting a dangerous precedent.

sbarre 9y ago
Did you understand the comment you replied to? The DMCA is not just about direct copyright infringement, but also about preventing the circumvention of technological protections for copyrighted content. No one is saying there was copyright infringement here. You can think that this is super bogus (I sure do) but make sure you understand the nature of what you're mad about. ;-)
- walterstucco 9y ago
  Blocking a domain does not circumvent any copyrighted content distribution It's like saying that turning off TV block the distribution of GOT hence is a tool to circumvent HBO copyright
  - jasonlotito 9y ago
    The mechanism in place here is that the domain provides code that sites use to will block content if the visitor is using an ad blocker. The argument being made is that by preventing this code from running by blocking the domain, the site thinks you should have access when in reality, they don't want to serve the content up to you. As for your TV comparison, the better comparison is probably with satellite TVs, where you are just decoding signals being sent to you anyways, and if they don't want you watching those signals, they shouldn't send them to you. It's not the same, but it's far closer than your comparison. Note, I'm not backing either side with this post. Only explaining the argument so you have a clear understanding of the issue at hand. Whether you agree with it or not is immaterial, but understanding the rational is important.
- swang 9y ago

goodplay 9y ago

What does ad-blocking have to do with copyright circumvention or copyright enforcement? The only think on that list is the domain name. I'm certain that including a name in a list does not fall under copyright (ample precedent that backs it up). In the unlikey (and unfathomable) case that it is protected under copyright, I bet it would fall under fair use. Trademark law isn't relevant to an entry in a machine database.

danarmak 9y ago
Admiral's domain serves software that enforces access restrictions to copyrighted content. Including their domain in an ad-blocking list is a way to circumvent the restrictions. Whether distributing a list of domain names counts as distributing "tools" or whatever the exact language of the act is, I don't know. This other subthread contains a better discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14991624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14991624
- goodplay 9y ago
  I doubt failing to contact a server would circumvent DRM. Blocking their servers would only make their DRM scheme fail and prevent access to said copyright material. Using the DMCA to protect company's defective and flawed DRM scheme does not constitute circumvention. As such, I do not believe that DMCA's anti-circumvention laws are relevant.
  - codedokode 9y ago
    They might use a scheme that would allow access by default and block it with a script from that domain. So blocking the domain becomes a circumvention (today I finally learned how to write this word). Or that domain could be used to collect views stats for copyrighted content and make decisions based on that stats. Blocking this domain is obviously messing with copyright protection scheme which is illegal inder DMCA.
warcher 9y ago
I think the argument would be that, say, the New York Times wrote an article, and that article included ads for their sponsor. This third party tool is making unauthorized edits to the New York Times' copyrighted material. I'm a hardline free speech dude, but I find it difficult to justify "We changed around your copyrighted work to remove stuff we decided we don't like." If you don't like ads, pay up or go elsewhere. You do not have a right to anybody else's IP.

nkkollaw 9y ago

Oh no, now I'm confused again... :-/

earenndil 9y ago

Ahhhhh. PERFECT. It looks like the counterargument here is that easylist itself isn't used to circumvent admiral, it's only a list. Other things, like ublock, are the ones that use the list, and are actually blocking admiral.