On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Daniel Pittman <dan...@rimspace.net> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 03:00, Michael C. Robinson > <plu...@robinson-west.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 01:57 -0700, Vincent L. Damewood wrote: >>> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Michael C. Robinson >>> <plu...@robinson-west.com> wrote: >>> >> Any real computing platform is going to make it >>> >> way, way more pain than just pirating the content would be. For your >>> >> protection, of course. ;) >>> > I'm not trying to pirate Blu-Ray discs. I do have a legal right to >>> > circumvent copy protection for making legitimate backup copies if I own >>> > the Blu-Ray disc.
That's confusing two (more, actually) issues. 1. You do not have a universal right to copy somebody else's product. 2. By circumventing the encryption, you aren't even copying the original product, you are substantially altering the product, against the wishes of the person who owns copyright to the product. >>> No, you don't, if the Blu-Ray Disc is encrypted. >> I respectfully disagree with you. A judge would have to enforce your >> interpretation which is ridiculous from the standpoint of fair use. It''s gone before judges in a few ways, with people being arrested, and jailed, and released, (in the US) for simply providing decryption capabilities and information. Fair use (in the legal sense) is *not* part of the US law preventing the circumvention of encryption. To repeat: If it's encrypted, fair use exceptions do not apply. Take that in for a second. > I can't really comment too much about local law, and I am not a > lawyer, but I can assure you that in Australia that interpretation is > backed by at least some court precedent. It varies all over the place. The law is a mess. Nothing new there. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-circumvention > Sad to say, these technical > measures *are* effective ways of preventing people doing legitimate > things with legitimate data they paid for. See, this is where your argument has problems. You did not pay for the right to decrypt *and* copy the data for personal use. That's not a legitimate use, nor is it protected. That's what copy-right is, where all of this mess comes from... you do *not* have a right to make unencrypted copies. You can call it a "backup", if you leave it encrypted, bit for bit, and get some legal cover, but once you alter it, things get sketchy really fast. -Bop _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
