3 ms·

Yes, technically I'd be going for a declaratory judgement of non-circumvention. It's been done before. Matthew Green brought a declaratory judgement case on se

• 1vuio0pswjnm7 6y ago
  The EFF on behalf of Prof. Green is not arguing "non-circumvention". They admit Green has performed circumvention. They argue 1201 as applied to Green's work is unconstitutional. Again, the RIAA is not alleging circumvention. They are alleging publication/trafficking in circumvention technology.
  • ikeboy 6y ago
    It's not a direct match, but that's to be expected in an underexplored area of law. To get really precise, I'd probably argue along these lines: 1. Declaration that YouTube's rolling cipher isn't an effective access control or copy control 2. Declaration that my actions don't count as marketing in violation of 1201(b)(1)(c), or alternatively that any marketing was not in violation of that section. 3. Declaration that my fork of youtube-dl isn't primarily designed or produce for the purpose as in 1201(b)(1)(a) 4. Declaration that youtube-dl has substantial commercially significant purpose or use beyond circumvention on copyrighted content, as per 1201(b)(1)(b) I don't think access controls is a winner, although I'd probably throw in the analogous declaratory judgement counts for 1201(a)(2) just in case. Depending on how RIAA defends it, I could add declaratory judgement counts addressing their specific claims.