7 ms·
I think it is, too, but "is this sufficiently obfuscatory to fall under the DMCA or not" is really only something a court can decide- it's not a technical quest
by roywiggins 6y ago
I think it is, too, but "is this sufficiently obfuscatory to fall under the DMCA or not" is really only something a court can decide- it's not a technical question. So "this is obviously not DRM" is an argument, but until a court says otherwise the RIAA seems to have a leg to stand on.
- sudosysgen 6y agoI mean, technically, can this be called obfuscation when Google provides to you the code to de obfuscate it?
- roywiggins 6y agoThat's how DRM usually works, one way or another.
- Chris2048 6y ago"is really only something a court can decide" Sometimes I think the scope of what a court is allowed to decide is crazy. It allows new concepts to be manufactured for the convenience of muddying the legal waters. Why the hell legislate around "DRM" and then decide later what that means.