If it was not for DRM removal tools I would have recently been screwed by Amazon, here is my story:<p>I was a longtime customer (easily 10 years or more I think) and have bought every version of Kindle to have come out over the years (unfortunately they break easily) and have build up a large collection<p>Recently I replaced the debit card on my account as the old one expired, placed and order for a digital game code for my xbox one (done it many times before) and bang my account was nuked. Yes I used 2fa no my account was not hacked by anyone. No I never abused their refund policy as some people do. Yes I tried resetting my password and get an email about password change BUT still can not login as it errors out.<p>I must have rang dozen of times (chat doesnt work if you dont have an account) and send as many emails to everyone from support to jeff@amazon.com (apparently this is a shortcut to get attention to your case) in all cases was told an "account specialist" would get in contact, yadda yadda but no luck.<p>If it was not for deDRM tools (which I started to use after the 1984 "incident" few years back) all of my books would have been unreadable now, had to deregister the kindle too since account doesnt work.<p>I wonder how many people who are not as tech savy get screwed and are left with nothing.
On their website is a banner: "Cancel netflix!". I click on it, and I'm told I should cancel netflix because they put DRM on their HTML5 delivery of movies.<p>Now look, Im a self-professed pirate. I say screw most DRM and I dont recognize IP law. However, I totally disagree that I should "cancel netflix". What are they supposed to do ? Deliver all their movies DRM-free and see them immediately get copied to torrent sites ? Or else, what , not use HTML5 and require STB/smart tv support to use their product (which ALL have DRM, btw ) ?<p>Netflix is the <i>good guy</i>, they are pioneers in electronic content delivery. They are fighting to break the monopoly of the movie industry while having to work <i>with </i> them to get content. And they are producing their own content. All for a very reasonable rate.<p>I will absolutely NOT cancel netflix because they support DRM. What a ridiculous thing to suggest.
Just a friendly reminder that there are online shops that sell DRM-free content. I found this guide helpful: <a href="https://www.defectivebydesign.org/guide" rel="nofollow">https://www.defectivebydesign.org/guide</a><p>In particular, I'm a Downpour.com customer for audio books. Up until now they had all the content I wanted, high quality too. And with a subscription the prices are good.<p>I've also bought DRM-free games from Gog.com. E-books I sometimes buy from Google Play, where they have mixed content. I only bought DRM-free books from them, like for example the books in the Ender's Game series. The publishers of all technical books I needed, like O'Reilly or Manning, are publishing DRM-free. If I want a book that's only available as DRM-enabled, I buy it in print.<p>For music, I used to have a Google Play Music subscription and also tried Apple Music. But then I realized that I need streaming for work basically and online radio is better. For example I like RadioParadise.com, they are ads free.<p>Bitching about DRM to let other people know about its problems is cool, but even cooler is voting with your wallet.
It appears the EFF intend to fight section 1201 (thou shalt not circumvent) on first amendment free speech arguments, and on the idea that punishment for circumvention creates a chilling effect.<p>I don't think a court will buy it. They'll argue that 1201 protects the free speech of content creators, and that it works as intended - and they will cite the decss appeal, which was won by the media giants on the same argument. <a href="https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.2600.com/news/112801-files/universal.html</a>
The fact is both sides of this have a lot to answer for in terms of eroding the underlying relationship when it comes to any consumer/creator transaction. For a long time media companies made it artificially hard to purchase content legally and in so doing are at least partially responsible for the rampancy of piracy. In turn, a lot of people got used to pirating content for free instead of paying for it, even when reasonably priced options were made available.<p>A decent number of pirates now refuse to pay for digital content/software because "information should be free." This is a farce and anyone who earns a living writing software or producing content knows it.<p>A decent number of media companies now treat their customers like criminals, constantly checking and rechecking if they actually own the stuff they're trying to use, which would be fine more or less if the software doing this actually worked. If any one of the thousand links in that given chain break, then the media the customer has paid for becomes unusable or is even deleted, and that is unacceptable.<p>Both sides have their bad actors and it's hard to see a way out of this mess.
Two blogs deep is the actual lawsuit: [1] Here's the legal theory: <i>"To the extent that Section 1201 forbids circumvention even where such activity would be a noninfringing use (such as a fair use), or facilitates other lawful uses, it undermines the constitutionally required balance between copyright liability and the First Amendment and thereby disturbs the traditional contours of copyright."</i><p>As a constitutional claim, that's weak, not being an absolute First Amendment claim. The courts tend to defer to Congress where there's a balancing test. But let's see what happens.<p>[1] <a href="https://www.eff.org/document/1201-complaint" rel="nofollow">https://www.eff.org/document/1201-complaint</a>
Anti-circumvention laws should be repealed of course. But so far such attempts didn't go far. If this lawsuit will succeed, things will be easier, but it's a pretty random thing with courts. It might as well fail. What should be done is much stronger pressure on legislators to fix this mess. Most simply don't care about this issue because they don't understand its deep impact, and in result, politicians get away with keeping the status quo achieved through corrupted undemocratic lawmaking.
DRM is a symptom. The disease is ridiculously expansive and one-sided copyright law.<p>This is still good fight. Although I'm not optimistic. If DMCA wasn't laughed out of the courts when it made Sharpie(tm) markers illegal "circumvention devices" I kind of doubt that logic and rationality is in control at our legislative and judicial systems.
So, I just kinda-sorta stumbled upon this thought and would like your honest opinions regarding a proposition:<p>Remove Section 1201 (DRM Circumvention) and Section 512 (Safe Harbor) at the same time.<p>What happens next?
DRM exists to counter piracy. Without DRM, the publishers/authors have to rely on the end customer, who, more often than not, will encourage piracy either by sharing our not buying through official channels<p>The concerns raised are against corporations' clumsy implantations and you have to make your case heard against them.
I wonder if you could make a fourth amendment claim as well. It can hardly be said you can be secure in your effects if your effects are working against you.
The link is to a reasonably thought out and worded perspective from that of a technology industry participant. As noted within, there are some guiding principles which establish the basis for perspective and action. As in, the Free Software Foundation wouldn't be interested in participating in the for-profit software market.<p>For a counter-point, when this case first broke and I was able to study the implications from a creator and "IP holder" perspective, I wrote the following essay:<p><a href="https://medium.com/@6StringMerc/arguments-against-the-dmca-section-1201-lawsuit-by-the-eff-b8d760de3fdf#.f5l4oo6an" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@6StringMerc/arguments-against-the-dmca-s...</a><p>I will genuinely engage with anyone who would like to take some assertions or postulations of mine and challenge them for the sake of discussion. These are important topics!