Ed Felton writes about a rather astonishing position of the RIAA and similar groups ...
...You read that right. They’re worried that there might be “serious doubt” about whether their future DRM access control systems are covered by these exemptions, and they think the doubt “would be even more severe” if the “exemption would turn on whether access controls ‘threaten critical infrastructure and potentially endanger lives’.”
Yikes.
One would have thought they’d make awfully sure that a DRM measure didn’t threaten critical infrastructure or endanger lives, before they deployed that measure. But apparently they want to keep open the option of deploying DRM even when there are severe doubts about whether it threatens critical infrastructure and potentially endangers lives.
And here’s the really amazing part. In order to protect their ability to deploy this dangerous DRM, they want the Copyright Office to withhold from users permission to uninstall DRM software that actually does threaten critical infrastructure and endanger lives.
If past rulemakings are a good predictor, it’s more likely than not that the Copyright Office will rule in their favor.
At some level it may become prudent to refuse to buy or use any drm protected content. The risks of piracy may be much less than those associated with legal purchases.
Comments