[free-sklyarov] An Alternative Line of Argumentation

[Julian T. J. Midgley]

On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Seth David Schoen wrote:

> Izel Sulam writes:
>
> > I would like to repeat very strongly what my suggestions are for statements
> > to the press tomorrow. Statements to the press should stress that this is a
> > consumer rights issue. Adobe makes a very expensive line of crypto
> > products, and claims that these are secure, and they are not, and this is a
> > fraud and a sham, and Dmitry Sklyarov brought this to the attention of the
> > world, and now Adobe is getting him illegally arrested rather than
> > imporving their products.
>
> However, "improving" their products would harm consumer rights even
> more.  Consumers aren't the ones who want "security" that tries to
> prevent ordinary uses of digital media.

This is true, but is to a certain extent a separate issue.  Irrespective
of whether or not consumers want security that prevents fair use,
copyright holders might want products that try to prevent abuse of
copyright.  I don't believe that the latter is an unreasonable desire, but
I very strongly believe that it is in everyone's interests (especially the
copyright holders) for flaws in products designed to prevent copyright
abuse to be able to be discussed publically without anyone being at risk
of imprisonment or lawsuit.  It is conceivable that it is possible to
design a product to prevent copyright abuse that does not simultaneously
prevent fair use.

In many ways, though, the clauses of the DMCA targeted at those defeating
copyright protection mechanisms are *absolutely unnecessary*.  It is
already an offence to abuse copyright by making illegal copies.  Copyright
holders can sue those who abuse their copyright, without any need whatever
for a separate law allowing them to sue (or have subject to criminal
prosecution) those who defeat their copyright protection mechanisms.

It is not an offence to manufacture crowbars (that can be used to break
into people's houses) nor does it need to be, since it is an offence to
break into people's houses.  Similarly, it should not be an offence to
sell products which defeat copyright protection mechanisms (since there
can be perfectly legitimate uses of such products - qv. the software that
can de-click the new protected CDs[0], for example), since it is
sufficient to be able to prosecute those who make illegal copies.

The anti-circumvention sections of the DMCA are simply not required, and
should be struck out.  Doing so would neither harm the interests of
copyright holders, nor those of the general public.

Julian


[0] This same software can also be used for cleaning up tracks copied from
vinyl records or analogue tapes - both perfectly legitimate uses (provided
the person concerned has the right to make such copies).

-- 
Julian T. J. Midgley                    http://www.xenoclast.org
Cambridge, England.                       PGP Key ID: 0xBCC7863F