title: Who doesn't love librarians? Or, Modding the DCMA link: https://onemoretech.wordpress.com/2010/07/26/who-doesnt-love-librarians-or-modding-the-dcma/ author: lembobro description: post_id: 137 created: 2010/07/26 15:57:27 created_gmt: 2010/07/26 15:57:27 comment_status: open post_name: who-doesnt-love-librarians-or-modding-the-dcma status: publish post_type: post

Who doesn't love librarians? Or, Modding the DCMA

Big news from Washington, D.C. in the eternal struggle of art and science against Big Money.

The Librarian of Congress has just issued new rules on some exceptions to the prohibitions found in the DCMA against circumvention of access controls.

Librarian of Congress James H. Billington today released the following statement:

Section 1201(a)(1) of the copyright law requires that every three years I am to determine whether there are any classes of works that will be subject to exemptions from the statute’s prohibition against circumvention of technology that effectively controls access to a copyrighted work.

---

Today I have designated six classes of works. Persons who circumvent access controls in order to engage in noninfringing uses of works in these six classes will not be subject to the statutory prohibition against circumvention.

---

(1) Motion pictures on DVDs that are lawfully made and acquired and that are protected by the Content Scrambling System when circumvention is accomplished solely in order to accomplish the incorporation of short portions of motion pictures into new works for the purpose of criticism or comment, and where the person engaging in circumvention believes and has reasonable grounds for believing that circumvention is necessary to fulfill the purpose of the use in the following instances:
(i) Educational uses by college and university professors and by college and university film and media studies students;
(ii) Documentary filmmaking;
(iii) Noncommercial videos

(2) Computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute software applications, where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications, when they have been lawfully obtained, with computer programs on the telephone handset.

(3) Computer programs, in the form of firmware or software, that enable used wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless telecommunications network, when circumvention is initiated by the owner of the copy of the computer program solely in order to connect to a wireless telecommunications network and access to the network is authorized by the operator of the network.

(4) Video games accessible on personal computers and protected by technological protection measures that control access to lawfully obtained works, when circumvention is accomplished solely for the purpose of good faith testing for, investigating, or correcting security flaws or vulnerabilities, if:
(i) The information derived from the security testing is used primarily to promote the security of the owner or operator of a computer, computer system, or computer network; and
(ii) The information derived from the security testing is used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright infringement or a violation of applicable law.

(5) Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete. A dongle shall be considered obsolete if it is no longer manufactured or if a replacement or repair is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace; and

(6) Literary works distributed in ebook format when all existing ebook editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling either of the book’s read-aloud function or of screen readers that render the text into a specialized format.

This is a significant ruling by the LOC, making explicit exceptions that really should have been in the law from the beginning.

The LOC has a website dedicated to section 1201 with links to further information.

Of course the usual disclaimer accompanies these new rules:

This is not a broad evaluation of the successes or failures of the DMCA. The purpose of the proceeding is to determine whether current technologies that control access to copyrighted works are diminishing the ability of individuals to use works in lawful, noninfringing ways. The DMCA does not forbid the act of circumventing copy controls, and therefore this rulemaking proceeding is not about technologies that control copying.

Would that we could get such a “broad evaluation” of the DCMA over a decade over its original enactment. But then even getting on the legislative calendar nowadays takes an act of God, or at least a wish from Wall Street.

Copyright 2004-2019 Phil Lembo