Repeal the Digital Milennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
It is evident that the framers of the infamous Digital Millenium Copyright Act intended it to have a transformative effect on the public and legal perception of intellectual property. In the attempt to develop a fully-realized definition of what constitutes infringement, fair use, and the rights of users in the consumption of digital works, the DMCA has had quite the opposite effect by institutionalizing considerable legal ambiguity. The recent spat between the John McCain presidential campaign and YouTube has demonstrated that both practitioners of law and a leading supporter of the DMCA are no closer to understanding the controversial law than the general populace.
With so much confusion and abuse surrounding the DMCA, isn't it time we start over and take a fresh approach to intellectual property that doesn't irreconcilably tip the scales in favor of big media?
sunnyrabbiera
I agree, too many have abused it.
We either need a reform or a total dismemberment of the DMCA
5 months ago
jonvanhala
This definitely needs to be revisited and acted upon. I believe in the creators right to IP and we need to create a law that is understandable and fair to all while creating a fertile playing field
6 months ago
this
Envision a world where people will not own music, books, games or photos or electronic devices but will pay for them each and every time they use them via subscription/expiration...it is happening...it will happen....and what will be gained and what will be lost?
6 months ago
FotoGuy
So, which parts of this act need repeal?
7 months ago
FotoGuy
--1203. and 1204.
--- Rules for the courts in rewarding damages
Title 2 is the Safe Harbor part. Basically, Online Companies cannot be held responsible for its users infringements
Title 3 allows computer repair personel to make copies of data while repairing
Title 4 Allows broadcasters to have a copy of a performance, for the purpose of transmitting it.
7 months ago
FotoGuy
--1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems
---Basically says you cannot remove DRM measures unless it restricts your Fair Rights to the item
---It allows you to Reverse Engineer software to achieve interoperability
---Made MacroVision required
--1202. Integrity of copyright management information
--- Basically, you are not allowed to remove or falsify copyright info
7 months ago
FotoGuy
--1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems
---Basically says you cannot remove DRM measures unless it restricts your Fair Rights to the item
---It allows you to Reverse Engineer software to achieve interoperability
---Made MacroVision required
--1202. Integrity of copyright management information
--- Basically, you are not allowed to remove or falsify copyright info
7 months ago
FotoGuy
Since DMCA is missunderstood, Here's a summary:
DMCA has 5 Titles, I not include the 5th as its about boat Hulls, go figure!
Title 1 contains:
-Updates and additions to Definitions in various parts of the Copyright Law
-Added Chapter 12, "COPYRIGHT PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS" Which contains these sections:
7 months ago
FotoGuy
This is a good discussion to have, but it is not relevant to repealing the DMCA Act. "Big Business" not wanting you to post their property on the web for everyone to get freely is a simple copyright issue. Repealing DMCA would not change that.
Furthermore, it actually helps the homegrown producer or small business by not allowing the removal of their copyright information (Ch.12 Sec 1201)
7 months ago
ricster
The big media companies should have no greater say, control or rights over the publishing of creative content on the internet than the homegrown producer or small business. The internet represents an ideal open platform where content can be judged based solely on its own quality. New Media Creators must not be subjected to censorship, throttling or carrier charges in order to reach their audience.
7 months ago
Alexgrieve
Musicalrunner's comment is an argument for amendment, not repeal. After Web 2.0 comes 2.1... and then 3.0 in a form we haven't even imagined yet. Bureaucracy runs behind creativity, big business gets in the way; DMCA needs the flexibility to balance intellectual property with fair use, remove obstacles, reward creators and penalise pirates. Will the three-year rulemaking capacity be enough?
7 months ago
FotoGuy
This act does protect your Fair Use rights. Title 17 Ch.12, sec. 1201, subsection (c)(1) states: "Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title."
So, you can circumvent the DRM to make a personal copy, either analog or digital.
It also protects ISPs and websites from the acts of their users.
7 months ago
NicholasB
Copyright laws were not designed for digital content. What is required is a proper legal, social, and technical review of the copyright regime to update it for the interconnected, interactive, world of the future. A future where all contributors – artists, authors, performers, producers, distributors, and consumers – have their rights protected.
See: http://www.commonrights.com
7 months ago
chrisf826
I am wondering if a funding pool would be most apropriate to ensure artists get their losses recovered from piracy, this could be a small fee attached to every storeage device upon purchase? Once this is streamlined and enacted. drop the criminal and exorbitant legal fees and penalties for filesharing.
7 months ago
pmocek
See also: "Adopt EFF's Innovation Agenda" (http://obamacto.uservoice.com/pages/general/suggestions/71893). It includes repairing the DMCA.
7 months ago
FreeCulture
freeculture.org
7 months ago
USGeek
NO. While the act could use some tweaking, all a repeal would do is circumvent the rights of artists and composers, not necessarily "big business." People are still looking for a way to get something for nothing, and still whining when they get caught. There's lots of "free" music out there, but that doesn't mean that everything is. Quit depriving people of their livelihood by stealing their work.
7 months ago
Sir_Sid
The Safe Harbor clause is important. We cant get rid of that.
7 months ago
themaskedanalyst
The DMCA is blatantly unconstitutional. We have a constitutional right to speak anonymously on the internet. However, if your speech or video is the target of a takedown notice you either have to give up your anonymity or commit perjury to file a counternotice--even if the takedown notice was bogus. For more details see:
http://www.themaskedanalyst.com/The%20DMCA%20is%20Uncontstitutional.htm
7 months ago
ohmightyvlog
DMCA is a pile of bologna, I got slapped with 2 in ONE day because someone found a way into my wi-fi and downloaded illegal HBO shows, it is not inforceable in a fair way, if I had gotten one more they would have killed my Internet, for a crime I did not even commit.
7 months ago