> This is not true. It is only illegal to crack DRM of copyright-protected works. Once a work falls out of copyright, it's fully legal to crack any DRM. There'

> This is not true. It is only illegal to crack DRM of copyright-protected works. Once a work falls out of copyright, it's fully legal to crack any DRM. There's a huge grey area there for DRM schemes that are used on expired works, but also on currently copyrighted works. You would need to be _very_ sure that the DRM scheme is only used on works where the copyright has expired. It's an important distinction; otherwise you could simply create a version of "Happy Birthday" with the latest and greatest DRM, then proceed to crack it and come out with a legal way to crack that DRM on any work. > It's truly fucked up that privileged people feel like they can decide how other people should earn their living just so that they can avoid spending a few bucks. That's not the only reason, although for some it is the primary reason. DRM can also make legally acquired software worthless (i.e. if they require key servers, but they shut down the key servers). DRM can also tie you to a particular device, like Amazon's ebooks. Doesn't it seem kind of fucked up that I can buy a thing, but I can only use it at the pleasure of the seller? Nope, you can't put that Wonderbread in this toaster. This toaster only takes GE branded GeneralToast bread; violations will be prosecuted under the DMCA. There are more general arguments against the theory of copyright in general, but you've likely seen them and I don't have anything grand to add to them.