US Completely Censors 70 Sites

Status
Not open for further replies.

Veho

The man who cried "Ni".
Former Staff
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
11,347
Trophies
3
Age
42
Location
Zagreb
XP
39,844
Country
Croatia
Guild McCommunist said:
If I download a CD I'm essentially depriving the artist of cash and paying nothing for something. The artist gets nothing in return. That's not balance in any sense of the word.
Actually, according to a recent study, if you download a CD, you're more likely to buy it legally later on.
nyanya.gif
 

Urza

hi
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
6,493
Trophies
0
XP
773
Country
United States
Rydian said:
Urza said:
QUOTE said:
No, it can't. Homebrew is legal provided it doesn't use copyrighted code. Which it doesn't most of the time and if it does then we don't host it here. If there's a day that homebrew becomes illegal then I doubt that'll be what we're worrying about the most. And by that day I'll be hopping on the same train as you.
Except to run unsigned code (in the case of the DS) you must use a flashcart, which utilizes copyrighted code to function. The flashcarts themselves are illegal.
DSi, and only on a later firmware.
That is incorrect.

Every slot-1 flashcart utilizes a built-in NoPass chip, which contains the encryption scheme reverse-engineered from a commercial cart.

Under the DMCA this is blatantly illegal.
 

Rydian

Resident Furvert™
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
27,880
Trophies
0
Age
36
Location
Cave Entrance, Watching Cyan Write Letters
Website
rydian.net
XP
9,111
Country
United States
Urza said:
That is incorrect.

Every slot-1 flashcart utilizes a built-in NoPass chip, which contains the encryption scheme reverse-engineered from a commercial cart.

Under the DMCA this is blatantly illegal.1 - You don't need to have the encryption scheme, you only need to give the DS the info it's looking for. As this article shows, even in the updated case of the DSi you still only need to respond with a few static (not copywritten-program-derived) commands it's looking for. As we learned from the HD-DVD encryption key scheme (and as Intel learned when trying to sue an 80386 clone maker) you can't copyright a number.

2 - The DMCA does not make bypassing DRM inherently illegal like it was previously thought.
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2010/Librari...-Statement.htmlQUOTEThe DMCA does not forbid the act of circumventing copy controls
 

Urza

hi
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
6,493
Trophies
0
XP
773
Country
United States
Rydian said:
Urza said:
That is incorrect.

Every slot-1 flashcart utilizes a built-in NoPass chip, which contains the encryption scheme reverse-engineered from a commercial cart.

Under the DMCA this is blatantly illegal.1 - You don't need to have the encryption scheme, you only need to give the DS the info it's looking for. As this article shows, even in the updated case of the DSi you still only need to respond with a few static (not copywritten-program-derived) commands it's looking for. As we learned from the HD-DVD encryption key scheme (and as Intel learned when trying to sue an 80386 clone maker) you can't copyright a number.

2 - The DMCA does not make bypassing DRM inherently illegal like it was previously thought.
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2010/Librari...-Statement.html
QUOTE said:
The DMCA does not forbid the act of circumventing copy controls
That ruling doesn't apply at all to this situation. Here is the relevant passage:

QUOTE
``(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—

``(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
``(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
``Â is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
 

Rydian

Resident Furvert™
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
27,880
Trophies
0
Age
36
Location
Cave Entrance, Watching Cyan Write Letters
Website
rydian.net
XP
9,111
Country
United States

Urza

hi
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
6,493
Trophies
0
XP
773
Country
United States
Rydian said:
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2010/Librari...-Statement.html
QUOTE said:
The DMCA does not forbid the act of circumventing copy controls, and therefore this rulemaking proceeding is not about technologies that control copying.
I didn't quote the entire sentence because there's no context or lack of context for the bit of it I quoted.
The passage I posted above regards to intent. While bypassing DRM is not inherently illegal, if its done with the intent to manufacture and sell a product designed for pirating copyrighted works then it is in violation.
 

Urza

hi
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
6,493
Trophies
0
XP
773
Country
United States
Rydian said:
Can you explain why the librarian of congress said what they did, then?
Once again, it's intent. The ruling was to clarify several scenarios in which bypassing copy protection would not be in violation.
 

Rydian

Resident Furvert™
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
27,880
Trophies
0
Age
36
Location
Cave Entrance, Watching Cyan Write Letters
Website
rydian.net
XP
9,111
Country
United States
Urza said:
The ruling was to clarify several scenarios in which bypassing copy protection would not be in violation.But...
QUOTEThe DMCA does not forbid the act of circumventing copy controls, and therefore this rulemaking proceeding is not about technologies that control copying.
????????
 

Urza

hi
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
6,493
Trophies
0
XP
773
Country
United States
Rydian said:
Urza said:
The ruling was to clarify several scenarios in which bypassing copy protection would not be in violation.But...
QUOTEThe DMCA does not forbid the act of circumventing copy controls, and therefore this rulemaking proceeding is not about technologies that control copying.
????????
I'm not sure if you're trolling at this point, or truly aren't capable of understanding what I'm posting here.

Yes, it's not about the technologies present in the scenarios. The scenarios lay out various usages which attempt to establish intent. The first scenario, for example, the established intent is that the work will be used under Fair Use. The fact that the content is from a DVD is irrelevant.
 

Rydian

Resident Furvert™
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
27,880
Trophies
0
Age
36
Location
Cave Entrance, Watching Cyan Write Letters
Website
rydian.net
XP
9,111
Country
United States
Urza said:
I'm not sure if you're trolling at this point, or truly aren't capable of understanding what I'm posting here.I'm pointing out direct contradictions in text. Last I checked a contradiction is not easy to understand.

QUOTE(Urza @ Nov 30 2010, 01:51 PM) Yes, it's not about the technologies present in the scenarios. The scenarios lay out various usages which attempt to establish intent. The first scenario, for example, the established intent is that the work will be used under Fair Use. The fact that the content is from a DVD is irrelevant.
This is stuff you may have thought in your mind, but didn't post, therefore I couldn't get.
 

RiderLeangle

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
511
Trophies
1
Age
31
Website
ridersrealm.b1.jcink.com
XP
1,835
Country
United States
Guild McCommunist said:
If I download a CD I'm essentially depriving the artist of cash and paying nothing for something. The artist gets nothing in return.
If you want to be technical... Someone had to buy it to rip it...
And that doesn't mean you didn't support the band at all.. I mean I download all my music and yet when one band I like came around here I went to their concert and bought a shirt (And this was at a concert so it was 30...)
If I didn't have downloaded songs in the first place how would I know if I liked the band?..
Downloading something doesn't mean the owner gets nothing...
 

Urza

hi
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
6,493
Trophies
0
XP
773
Country
United States
Rydian said:
Urza said:
Yes, it's not about the technologies present in the scenarios. The scenarios lay out various usages which attempt to establish intent. The first scenario, for example, the established intent is that the work will be used under Fair Use. The fact that the content is from a DVD is irrelevant.This is stuff you may have thought in your mind, but didn't post, therefore I couldn't get.


Urza said:
The passage I posted above regards to intent. While bypassing DRM is not inherently illegal, if its done with the intent to manufacture and sell a product designed for pirating copyrighted works then it is in violation.
QUOTE(Urza @ Nov 30 2010, 11:42 AM) QUOTE(Rydian @ Nov 30 2010, 11:03 AM)
Can you explain why the librarian of congress said what they did, then?
Once again, it's intent. The ruling was to clarify several scenarios in which bypassing copy protection would not be in violation.
 

Urza

hi
Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
6,493
Trophies
0
XP
773
Country
United States
Rydian said:
Urza said:
The first scenario, for example, the established intent is that the work will be used under Fair Use. The fact that the content is from a DVD is irrelevant.
This specifically.
Well it took me a few posts to realize that you either didn't read, or didn't understand the material you provided as substance for your "argument." The above is just a regurgitation from said material, and not really any new information from my brain.
 

Rydian

Resident Furvert™
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
27,880
Trophies
0
Age
36
Location
Cave Entrance, Watching Cyan Write Letters
Website
rydian.net
XP
9,111
Country
United States
Urza said:
Well it took me a few posts to realize that you either didn't read, or didn't understand the material you provided as substance for your "argument." The above is just a regurgitation from said material, and not really any new information from my brain.
What I provided (and was focused on) was the line from the librarian of congress, which doesn't directly mention the focused intent.

The quote from chapter 12 was something you provided, not me.

But please, ad hominem more, it's fun to watch.
rolleyes.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
    Xdqwerty @ Xdqwerty: ?draeh ton uoy evaH