However, the DMCA does not ban the act itself of circumventing copying controls, although it does ban the act of circumventing access controls. Unauthorized copying except as allowed by the fair use rules , making derivative works, distributing copies, etc.
In contrast, before the DMCA the act of circumventing access control technology was not itself unlawful. The prohibition against trafficking in tools to circumvent access controls has been applied broadly by the courts. Since similar language is used in the statute, presumably the ban on trafficking in tools to circumvent copy controls would also be applied broadly. In Universal City Studios, Inc. Corle y, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in upheld a lower court injunction against the Internet Web site www.
The unencrypted movies can then be played on any personal computer, copied and transmitted over the Internet. The owners complied, but then posted links to other, foreign Web sites from which DeCSS could be downloaded.
The final injunction was modified to prohibit the Web site owners from even posting the hypertext links to other sites from which DeCSS could be obtained.
The acts prohibited by the DMCA are unlawful regardless of whether they constitute copyright infringement. Conversely, the DMCA clearly states that it does not affect other rights or remedies. It does not affect rights, remedies, limitations or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use. It does not enlarge or diminish vicarious or contributory liability for copyright infringement. It does not require that any consumer electronics, telecommunications or computing product provide for a response to any particular technological measure.
It ostensibly does not enlarge or diminish any rights of free speech or the press. Particular Categories of Works. The DMCA sets forth a number of exemptions from its anti-circumvention and anti-trafficking rules. The first is an exemption from the basic rule barring the circumvention of access controls, for users of particular categories of works. The Librarian of Congress, for each successive three-year period beginning on October 28, , is to determine in a rule-making proceeding which categories of works have users who would be adversely affected by the ban on circumventing access controls in their ability to make noninfringing uses of the work.
The Librarian of Congress has made its determination for the initial three-year period, and has concluded that two classes of works will be subject to the exemption, at least until October 28, a compilations consisting of lists of websites blocked by filtering software applications, and b literary works, including computer programs and databases, protected by access control mechanisms that fail to permit access because of malfunction, damage or obsolescence.
This exemption does not apply to the rules against trafficking in tools to circumvent access controls, so as a practical matter this exemption, even if theoretically available, will in most cases not be useful because of the lack of tools to carry out the circumvention. Nonprofit Libraries, Archives and Educational Institutions. The DMCA allows nonprofit libraries, archives and educational institutions to circumvent access controls solely for the purpose of making a good faith determination as to whether they wish to obtain authorized access to the work, if the work is not reasonably available in another form.
Again, as a practical matter this exemption will in most cases not be useful because of the lack of tools to carry out the circumvention. Law Enforcement. Officers, agents and employees of governmental bodies are exempt from all the anti--circumvention rules in carrying out lawfully authorized law enforcement, intelligence and information security activities.
Reverse Engineering to Achieve Interoperability. One exemption that may have wide applicability is an exemption for reverse engineering to research and achieve interoperability between computer programs. Interoperability is defined here as the ability of computer programs to exchange and use information. A person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent access controls to a particular portion of the program, and may develop and use tools to circumvent access and copy controls, in order to achieve interoperability so long as doing so does not constitute copyright infringement.
The courts have generally upheld the process of reverse engineering against claims of copyright infringement. The access to the other program may only be for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability.
The information developed in this process, as well as the tools developed, may be shared with others solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer program with other programs. Encryption Research. The DMCA exempts encryption research from its circumvention and trafficking bans.
The researcher may also develop and employ tools to circumvent the access controls for the sole purpose of carrying out the research, and may share those tools with collaborative researchers. The DMCA lists several factors to be used in determining whether the exemption for good faith research should apply in a particular situation, including whether and how the research results were disseminated, whether the researcher is engaged in a course of study or is trained or experienced, and whether the researcher provides the copyright owner with the results of the research.
Protection of Minors. This provision gives a court, faced with an alleged access to a protected work in violation of the anti-circumvention rule or alleged trafficking in devices to facilitate circumvention of access controls, discretion in applying the rules.
In applying the prohibitions to a component or party, the court is to consider the necessity for its incorporation in a technology, product, service or device which does not itself violate the DMCA and which has the sole purpose of preventing the access of minors to material on the Internet.
This is obviously an narrow exemption, and lodging discretion in the court leaves a lot of unpredictability as to how it will be applied. Personal Privacy. The DMCA exempts circumvention of access controls that is done solely to prevent the collection or dissemination of personally identifying information about a natural person who seeks to gain access to the work protected. This exemption only applies if the technological measure, or the work it protects, collects or disseminates the personal information without providing conspicuous notice and the capability for the user to prevent or restrict the collection or dissemination.
Security Testing. Circumvention of access controls on copyrighted works is not a violation of the DMCA if it is done in the course of accessing a computer, computer system or computer network solely to carry out good faith testing, investigating or correcting of security flaws or vulnerabilities, with the authorization of the computer owner or operator.
Factors to be considered in determining whether the exemption for good faith testing is available in a particular situation include whether the information derived from the testing is used solely to promote security, and whether the information from the testing was used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright infringement. The one doing the testing may also develop and use tools to carry out the circumvention of access controls.
Specifically, no one may knowingly, and with the intent to induce, enable, facilitate or conceal infringement, either provide false CMI or distribute or import for distribution false CMI.
The restrictions apply to digital broadcasts of news and public affairs shows as well as entertainment programming. The rules also mandate that makers of consumer devices capable of receiving broadcast digital TV signals, such as VCRs and DVD players, include a broadcast card that will recognize the flag. Consumers still will be able to make unlimited copies of shows, but they will not be able to send them to other people through peer-to-peer networks on the Internet.
Critics say the rules encroach on fair use, which is defined as an individual's right to use copyright material in a reasonable manner without the consent of the copyright owner. They also say the rules will not prevent consumers from sharing digital shows, since products -- like older VCRs that don't recognize the flag -- already exist that make it possible to circumvent the restriction. The Motion Picture Association of America appealed to the FCC to pass the rules after the association failed to convince Congress to pass legislation that would bar Internet sharing.
Digital Rights Management is along the same lines, but involves more complexities. The different levels of DRM are:. So, what is the main difference between personal encryption and Digital Rights Management? In case of personal encryption, except for the intended recipient, everyone else is blocked out. But, in case of DRM, it blocks people out either temporarily or permanently, without human help and on a given set of conditions.
Qualitative and quantitative video streams for different price points — If you are ready to spend more money, you can get 4K, but if you want to pay the lowest price, you will have to settle for SD. Since it directly impacts the resolution physical data of the video stream , it affects the quality.
The more you pay, the higher quality you get. Region-centric video — Do you want to cater to a particular region? The reasons for this form of DRM could be either you are barred by law to cater to other regions, or you want to control the market dynamics. In such scenarios, you need region-specific management. Hence, codec licensing is another way you can control the viewing of your video.
Adaptive streaming — During adaptive streaming, the video dynamically adapts to the resolution, bit rate, etc. Because people have different devices, you need to use multiple encryption methods to protect your video. What has been encrypted by you today will be decrypted by someone else sooner rather than later. Hence, to get over the problem, you should use larger bit depths to encrypt your content. But this increases your overall costs and is also inconvenient to the end-users.
Technology keeps changing. What you encrypt today might get obsolete three years down the line. For this reason, you may need to eventually re-encode your content, or else it will become unreadable.
It means that you need to keep one unencrypted copy of your video in a safe place. You are bound by the licensing you buy. If someone hacks your encryption service, or if a better option comes up in the market, you will have to start the encryption process from scratch.
0コメント