- must comply with takedown notices
- outlaws technology to circumvent copyright-protection measures
Technology to control access to / use of digital media
Can enforce restrictions beyond those granted by copyright
Developed by Jon Johansen & two others, in Norway.
Arrested in 2000; acquitted in 2003.
Similar code developed by others - some for ripping, some for viewing DVDs on Linux
Code published in 2600 Magazine; sued by MPAA
Gallery of CSS Descramblers
Universal v. Reimerdes declared computer code not free speech
Developed "Advanced eBook Processor" - circumvented Adobe eBook protections
Arrested by FBI in 2001, at DEF CON convention in Las Vegas
Eventually acquitted - DMCA does not apply in Russia
Software kept secret
Machines alleged to have poor security; no paper trail
2003 - Swarthmore students posted internal Diebold memos to web
"Do not offer damaging opinions of our systems, even when their failings become obvious"
Diebold sent cease & desist letters, claiming DMCA violations
Court ruled use of DMCA was attempting to suppress free speech
Secure Digital Music Initiative issued public challenge to break their watermark system
Felten and team succeeded in three weeks
Planned to present technical paper on work
Threatened by SDMI & RIAA, withdrew presentation
See sections on Copyright, DMCA, DRM
Only A is "wrong".
Does cost of A outweigh benefits of others?