RE: The challenge of serving *EVERYONE* (was RE: Mozilla blog: DRM and the Challenge of Serving Users)

Karl Dubost
>
> > Look, you can weasel word your way around the legal definitions of
> > theft versus copyright "infringment", but the unauthorized copying of
> > digital content to circumvent lawful pay-for-use is wrong, and is
> > morally the same as stealing - at least in my books.
>
> Look, you can weasel word your way around the legal definitions of
> theft versus copyright "infringement", but the use of DRM on content to
> circumvent lawful fair use and personal backup copies is wrong, and is
> morally the same as stealing - at least in my books.
>

Which leads us to the next point: EME and CDMs today only apply to content 
delivered (streamed) to your browser, under terms of service which clearly 
state you do not "own" the works. Given that, there is no ownership applied 
that would justify making backup copies - the materials were never licensed to 
you to be used that way.

And if you want to argue "Fair Use", it is the forth "balancing factor" of the 
Fair Use doctrine that is in play here: the effect of the use upon the 
potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

The legal system has determined that DRM can remain because the unfettered 
ability to do mass copying has a significant impact on that potential market 
value.  If you disagree with that legal interpretation, contact your elected 
officials. Meanwhile, today, digital copy protection is legal, and those who 
wish to use the open web to distribute their materials that are legally 
protected should retain the right to do so.

On my Open Web, all animals are created equal: none are more equal than 
others.

JF

(c'mon Karl, we've been around this block before... :-) )

Received on Monday, 19 May 2014 23:31:26 UTC