US Copyright Office: locking hardware with DRM is no longer cool

Originally published at:


Am I crazy, or does that feel like a loophole big enough to drive a bus through, given the right lawyers and the right judge? “Possible” is a slippery term, and I really hope the official version is more precise.


“provided they own it”

Newer business models are to lease or license equipment, so you don’t technically own what you paid for.


All I know is: if this is a good thing for consumers, Stephen Miller or Mick Mulvaney or Mitch McConnell will be hard at work trying to defeat it.

We really are at a point where all you need to know is whether those 3 men agree on something. And whatever it is, anyone with decency should do the opposite with everything in their power.

1 Like

Cory’s post makes it sound like the scope of what is allowable is much more narrow than Seamus. Doesn’t sound cool as much as slightly more chill.

Ah, Ma Bell. I missed her.

The unfortunate fine print seems to be this:

Section 1201(a)(2) bars trafficking in products and services that are used
to circumvent technological measures that control access to copyrighted works (for
example, a password needed to open a media file),10 while section 1201(b) bars
trafficking in products and services used to circumvent technological measures that
protect the exclusive rights of the copyright owner in their works (for example,
technology that prevents the work from being reproduced). The Librarian of Congress
has no authority to adopt exemptions for the anti-trafficking prohibitions contained in
section 1201(a)(2) or (b).

The special exception-making process can bless specific, otherwise forbidden, circumvention of DRM mechanisms; but can’t authorize the distribution of the means to perform those now-legitimate activities. This pretty sharply limits the scope of any actually legitimized activity: either you need to derive it for yourself or use tools of dubious provenance.

Beats nothing(and, since team Copy Cop is against it it can’t be that bad); but this carve out mechanism is less helpful than it appears.

I posted to flickr central group discussion…
and ‘poza proza’…

included this part…

The directive was rejected in July following criticism of Articles 11 and 13, the so called “link tax” and “upload filter”. The morning of September 12 , an updated version was approved, along with amended versions of Articles 11 and 13. The final vote is scheduled to be in January 2019, but usually directives are amened many times, during years, before a final version is accepted by the MEPs of those states who intend to maybe implement it… if in the mean time the national coalition has not changed

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.