5 ms·
> It is circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a protected work To be fair, the law is worded so poorly that I'm not sure th
by saghm 3y ago
> It is circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a protected work
To be fair, the law is worded so poorly that I'm not sure that _anything_ can be considered a "clear" example of it. How can a measure be "effective" if it can be circumvented? If you're going to define "effective" in any way that includes this, you're going to need to explain why it wouldn't apply equally well to a loading screen message calling "dibs" when the game starts up. It's just as effective up until the point that you circumvent it (by just ignoring it)!
I do think that this is the type of thing that's _intended_ to be against this law, but it's hard to take that seriously as an argument that this justifies legal action when the view that laws should be read exactly as written and not "interpreted" for intent is promulgated with such fervor in many political circles.
- EMIRELADERO 3y agoBy "effective" it means "that has the effect of"
- saghm 3y agoI don't see how that clarifies anything; what effect does a measure that's been circumvented have, and how does it differ from the effect of a message of "dibs" that some people decide to abide by?
- EMIRELADERO 3y agoThe law says that nobody shall circumvent a technical protection measure that has the effect of controlling access to a copyrighted work.
- saghm 3y agoOkay, so how is my access controlled if I circumvent the measure? And how does that not apply equally well to me just being told in a "technical" way not to access something?
- zarzavat 3y agoYou are strawmanning the law whereas a judge interpreting it will steelman it.
- wtallis 3y agoExactly. A judge will not interpret the law as only outlawing what is impossible. And the law does provide a definition: > a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.
- saghm 3y agoThis is just continuing to move the question into new language that's not any less obtuse; if the game comes on a cartridge and I need to copy it onto a computer to put in an emulator, and the game's loading screen tells me not to, how is this not "a process" that doesn't have "the authority of the copyright owner" even if it's not encrypted in any way? Even more preposterously, if the game tells me I can only play on Tuesdays, and when it boots up it gives me a prompt saying "press A to continue if it's Tuesday, but if it's not, shut down the console and wait until Tuesday", and I ignore that and press A on Wednesday, how am I not performing a process (pressing A) without the authority of the copyright owner (who only gave me permission on Tuesdays)?
- saghm 3y agoSure, I don't actually think that my arguments would actually hold up in court, but that's kind of my point; the law is written very poorly, which means that the _actual_ legal effect is not nearly as clear to a lay person as the original comment I was responding to was arguing. I alluded to this in my second paragraph in my comment, but I guess I could have been more explicit.
- Jasper_ 3y agoIn the same way that you are still trespassing even if you can easily step over a fence saying "no entry". Try going to a judge and saying "well the sign lied, because yes I was able to entry when it said I shouldn't be able to" Crimes are not based on technicalities, they are based on intent. The environment put up resistance and signs to let you know it was trying to effectively control your access. You just willfully ignored them and stepped over the fence anyway.
- galleywest200 3y agoEven if I play my own games? I bought the game, I just want to play it on an emulator.
- EMIRELADERO 3y agoCourts have clarified that bypassing it "without the authority of the copyright owner" means the authority to access the work despite the technological protection measure. By default you can't access it without bypassing the measure.
- saghm 3y agoRepeating from another subthread: if the game tells me I can only play on Tuesdays, and when it boots up it gives me a prompt saying "press A to continue if it's Tuesday, but if it's not, shut down the console and wait until Tuesday", and I ignore that and press A on Wednesday, how am I not bypassing a technical measure (requiring an input electronically to the console) without the authority of the copyright owner (who only gave me permission do to so on Tuesdays)?
- immibis 3y agoThe access isn't very controlled if you give all your customers the key, now, is it?
- bitwize 3y ago> How can a measure be "effective" if it can be circumvented? "Effective" is defined in the law. It basically means any copy protection measure which, during the normal course of its operation (i.e., the happy path), prevents unauthorized copying. A bit of JavaScript that disables "Save Image As" qualifies. If you write a browser extension that knocks out that JavaScript, you could be civilly and criminally liable under the DMCA.
- immibis 3y agoThat's the intention. They make the law so unclear on purpose that they can arrest you for almost anything.
- Mindwipe 3y agoEffective is very clear in legal drafting - it means that there must be a function that occurs for this purpose, not that it has to succeed. Essentially all "effective" means is that you can't put a piece of paper in the box that says "this is a technical protection measure", you need to have some engineering that is intended to be one. No ambiguity in the drafting here, and if you took your argument to court you would lose.