3 ms·
This obviously isn't on you, but that title is terrible. The article itself says the case is actually about whether describing how to circumvent digital restric
by mindslight 2y ago
This obviously isn't on you, but that title is terrible. The article itself says the case is actually about whether describing how to circumvent digital restrictions management is protected speech, with an appellate courting ruling that it is not. That's a much bigger blow to our rights than anything regarding fair use - fair use inherently requires a fuzzy judgement, while speech should be quite clear cut.
- freedomben 2y agoI agree the title is sub-optimal, but I don't think it's terrible. It needs to appeal to a broad audience that may not know what DRM is, let alone how to remove it. In return for less accuracy, it becomes more understandable and meaningful to the average person.