279
You Can Remove DRM From Your Digital Books, but It's Probably Illegal (lifehacker.com)
submitted 2 years ago* by to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Title from the article. Interesting article, with some good words from our DRM-free favorite Cory Doctorow.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/40754848

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -6 points 2 years ago (18 children)

The DMCA makes it pretty clear that "Circumvention of Technological Protection Measures" is illegal. There are no exceptions for whether you own or redistribute the content in question.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (13 children)

    It's not needed.

    If another law says you have a right to create backups of digital content you own, then two laws are in conflict. Why would dcma have precedence?

    No idea about US, but in some countries it would be up to judges, and with enough rulings it would be settled one way or another.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    At least here in Germany the bypassing of DRM is so legal they don't even try to get you for it. The only thing they ever go after nowadays is distributing and consuming that cracked content (get logless VPN and that problem solves itself). But if you go and rip Netflix movies for your own enjoyment they have no leg to stand on in court unless you distribute it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Aussie copyright law gives us the right to circumvent protections in order to make copies to watch on a device the original can't be played on.

    Linux out of the box is remarkably incompatible with DRM protected content and so makes an excellent thing on which one might want to watch, listen to, or read a thing

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    If another law says you have a right to create

    That law doesn't exist and that's not how law works. Law does not specify what is allowed, only what isn't. Breaking encryption isn't.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    It exists in Sweden. We are allowed to make private copies of movies, music and whatever. If I want to rip a CD and give it to my family and friends that is 100% legal. But it's not legal to sell the copies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Didn't realize the DMCA applied in Sweden.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Many European countries (and companies there in) listen to and respect DMCA takedown requests and my point is that it does not apply to individuals. So yes, it applies in Sweden too. Maybe after Trump is done destroying the diplomatic relationships with Europe we can finally start not giving a shit about DMCA.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    We're not talking about takedown requests, we're talking about bypassing DRM.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Fair enough. We have the EUCD here and as I mentioned we cooperate with America to uphold copyright. I don't know exactly what is EU law and US law but they seem pretty similar. Ether way, our personal rights here reign supreme. Doesn't matter if it's copy protected.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    I don't care what some stupid US law says. It doesn't apply to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    That's great. This conversation was about the US.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    It really wasn't.

    You tried to make it about the US when the topic is about a company that operates internationally, that's what.

    Personally, I wouldn't be surprised is breaking national law in many countries with their one-size-fits-all approach.

    But I'd rather just not give a crap about that and just keep pirating my books.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •