MESSAGE
DATE | 2003-03-21 |
FROM | Dave Williams
|
SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] DMCA Comments
|
After browsing over it quickly, it looks to me like a compromise.
The Library of Congress asked the Copyright office to let them have a hearing. The Head Librarian said that some cases exist that shouldn't be prosecuted under the DMCA, and we'll describe them to you at the hearing.
The problem is that this assumes the DMCA is acceptable in the first place. Some of the law just need a little fine tuning is all!
Yet another attempt at a political solution (or YAAPS, in Linux-ese).
By the way, if you want to respond to the Voice article you may wish to submit it this weekend, so that it will stand a good chance of getting in the next issue.
- Dave
On Fri, 2003-03-21 at 19:38, Ruben I Safir wrote: > Can anyone make sense of this for me? > > http://www.copyright.gov/1201/ > > Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of > Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works > Important Notice: The email address for submission of requests to > testify that was posted on the Copyright Office website prior to 11:00 > a.m., E.S.T. on March 19, 2003, was inaccurate. The correct email > address is 1201-at-loc.gov and NOT 1201-at-nt3.loc.gov. Any requests that were > sent to 1201-at-nt3.loc.gov were not received, and anyone who sent such a > request must resubmit the request to the correct email address: > 1201-at-loc.gov. The Copyright Office will send an email confirmation of > receipt of all email requests to testify that are received by the > Office. > > New Development: > > Hearings Scheduled > > Section 1201(a)(1) title 17, United States Code > > Federal Register Notice Seeking Written Comments > > Comments > > Petition by Static Control Components, Inc. > > Federal Register Notice Seeking Comments on Petition > > Reply Comments > > Replies to Static Control Petition > > Background > > The Copyright Office is conducting the rulemaking proceeding mandated by > the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which provides that the Librarian > of Congress may exempt certain classes of works from the prohibition > against circumvention of technological measures that control access to > copyrighted works. > > The purpose of this proceeding is to determine whether there are > particular classes of works as to which users are, or are likely to be, > adversely affected in their ability to make noninfringing uses due to > the prohibition on circumvention of access controls. This page will > contain links to published documents in this proceeding. > > The Notice of Inquiry in this second anticircumvention rulemaking > requests written comments from all interested parties, including > representatives of copyright owners, educational institutions, libraries > and archives, scholars, researchers and members of the public, in order > to elicit evidence on whether noninfringing uses of certain classes of > works are, or are likely to be, adversely affected by this prohibition > on the circumvention of measures that control access to copyrighted > works. The initial round of comments (due December 18, 2002) is > restricted to comments proposing exemptions for specific classes of > works. Reply comments (due February 19) may be submitted in opposition > to or in further support of exemptions proposed in the initial comments. > Format Requirements > > The format requirements of comments and reply comments differs from > those of the previous (2000) rulemaking. In the initial comment phase, > all initial comments must identify the particular class of works for > which an exemption is proposed, must follow this identification with a > summary of the argument, and must then provide the factual and legal > argument that supports this proposal of a particular class. For every > class proposed, this format of class/summary/facts/argument should be > sequentially followed. Every comment itself must also contain the name > of the commenter and affiliation, if the comment is submitted on behalf > of an organization. The Copyright Office prefers that all comments be > submitted through the Office?s website via the form page during the > dates specified below. > > For all requirements and information on file formats, protection of > personal information, and other methods of submission, see the notice of > inquiry. Dates and Other Information > > Written comments were due by December 18, 2002. Reply comments were due > by February 19, 2003 (extended to Feb. 20 due to snow closure). Hearings > > The Copyright Office has scheduled hearings in this rulemaking in > Washington, D.C., on April 11, April 15, April 30, and May 2, 2003. > Hearings will also be conducted in California in May, on dates to be > announced soon. > > (Read more information on hearings.) Prior (2000) Anticircumvention > Rulemaking > > The entire record of the previous anticircumvention rulemaking is > available. > > For additional background on the anticircumvention provisions generally > and the previous anticircumvention rulemaking proceeding, see 64 FR > 66139 (1999). > > For the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights and the > determination of the Librarian of Congress in the previous > anticircumvention rulemaking, see 65 FR 64555, October 27, 2000. > > -- __________________________ Brooklyn Linux Solutions > __________________________ DRM is THEFT - We are the STAKEHOLDERS > http://fairuse.nylxs.com > > http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Consulting http://www.inns.net <-- Happy > Clients http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software > http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive or stories and > articles from around the net http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/downtown.html - > See the New Downtown Brooklyn.... > > 1-718-382-0585 > ____________________________ > NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene > Fair Use - > because it's either fair use or useless.... > NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
____________________________ NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene Fair Use - because it's either fair use or useless.... NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|