Please consider adding info@defectivebydesign.org to your address
book, which will ensure that our messages reach you and not your spam
box.

Read and share online:
https://www.defectivebydesign.org/blog/dmca_could_use_update_not_one_us_copyright_office_recommends

Dear Ruben Safir,

The United States Copyright Office has released a report recommending
updates to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), while leaving
anti-circumvention rules unchanged.

Over twenty years ago, the United States enacted a law known as the
DMCA. The law amended the Copyright Act of 1976, implementing a series
of rules addressing the changing technology landscape. The most
damaging aspect of that law is section 1201, which implements rules
preventing the circumvention of Digital Restrictions Management (DRM),
and the sharing of tools needed for circumvention. This aspect of the
law creates legal penalties for any user trying to control their own
computing, or who tries to help their neighbor do likewise. It's
pretty strange to refer to this activity as circumvention since really
it's just regaining full control of bits present on your own computer,
but this is the terminology used in the law. While ostensibly meant to
enforce copyright, companies and government agencies over
the past two decades have abused this law for whatever purpose they
see fit.

The anti-circumvention provisions harm all users, and the only
reprieve from its abuse is a comically broken exemptions
system. As we wrote previously:

Every three years, supporters of user rights are forced to go
through a Kafkaesque process fighting for exemptions from the
anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA... In short, under the
DMCA's rules, everything not permitted is forbidden. Unless we
expend time and resources to protect and expand exemptions, users
could be threatened with legal consequences for circumventing the
DRM on their own devices and software and could face criminal
penalties for sharing tools that allow others to do the
same. Exemptions don't fix the harm wrought by the DMCA's
anti-circumvention provisions, but they're the only crumbs Congress
deigned to throw us when they tossed out our rights as users.

For years now, we have called on the government to end this
madness and repeal the anti-circumvention provisions. So when the
Copyright Office released a report on the DMCA earlier this spring,
there was some hope that change would come. But our hopes were dashed
when the report's main recommendations related to other rules in the
DMCA, in particular the safe harbor provisions. The DMCA's safe harbor
provisions implement the take-down notice system that many users are
likely familiar with via video sharing sites. Users stung by
take-downs likely won't enjoy the Copyright Office's recommendations
on that aspect of the law, and the failure to meaningfully address or
recommend change to the anti-circumvention provisions is shameful.

The recommendations do nothing to protect the rights of users, who
have demanded for years that the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions
must be repealed. The report comes at an important time, as the United
States Congress is considering amending the decades-old law. But like
the Copyright Office, they too seem more interested in twisting up the
Internet over the law's safe harbor provisions.

While the buzz of change is in the air, for users, things are feeling
all too familiar. We are once again facing down the barrel of the
broken anti-circumventions exemptions process. The push for renewals
of previously existing exemptions has already begun, and the fight to
gain new exemptions will start in short order. Like so many times
before, activists will be expected to expend time and resources
proving that their rights are infringed by DRM, in order to gain
narrow exemptions that can be challenged every three years. Even where
we succeed in gaining exemptions, we know that sharing the tools
needed to take advantage of them will still be prohibited. If users
can't share knowledge and tools about how to remove DRM for one of the
exempt purposes, then only users skilled enough to break DRM on their
own can benefit from them -- an utterly ridiculous situation. So while
we will support specific exemptions in the hopes of winning a little
ground for freedom, our main message will continue to be that the
entire broken system should be abolished.

And continue we must. Past actions have gained us some success, like
simplifying the process for renewing exemptions, but we have to
keep building on that success and keep fighting for every inch. The
Copyright Office and Congress ignore us at their peril, because users
have the right to control their own computing, and people will never
give up fighting for their rights. Will you help us in this fight?
Please contact your local congressional representative and let them
know that any amendment to the DMCA has to repeal the
anti-circumvention provisions.

Cheers!

Donald R. Robertson, III, J.D.

Licensing and Compliance Manager