- From: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:46:37 -0800 (PST)
- To: Thomas Phinney <tphinney@adobe.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
> Thomas Phinney: > > > 3) Why is nobody worried about access control being a DMCA-covered > > issue? Not just for fonts, but for any resources that use it? Is it > > because the answer to my question #2 above is "yes"? > > Boris Z: > > Because there is no issue of additional controls on access here. The > > data is public (modulo cookies, etc). If you access it via wget (or > > heck, telnet to port 80) you will get it (again, modulo cookies). > > Since > > the data is only being exposed to those explicitly authorized to get it > > (everyone, the user with cookies, etc, depending on the site > > configuration) there is no circumvention of anything going on. > > > > At least as far as I can see. > > And what stops somebody from writing a patch to an open source browser > that changes that? That is, exactly the same scenario that was posited > as being an issue with obfuscation.... The access control mechanism is intended as a general mechanism for handling cross-site requests. It's not designed to be mechanism for enforcing copyright restrictions, so I don't think it's as easy to say that it falls under the circumvention provisions of laws like the American DMCA. The use of root strings is clearly intended as a copyright protection mechanism. Here's the spec for the access control mechanism: http://www.w3.org/TR/access-control/ John Daggett Mozilla Japan
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2008 05:47:18 UTC