Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The thing is, we don't need a blanket ban on digital lock breaking to satisfy the WIPO treaty (I assume that's what you mean). The C-11 model of 'balance' leans heavily on:

* Content owners voluntarily making their content available (e.g. the 'permission culture' among academics);

* Content available in multiple formats, some of which may not have digital locks;

* The ability for government apparatus to regulate exceptions on the fly; and

* The government's insistence that it would be highly unlikely for a digital lock violation based on fair dealing to result in damages.

Essentially, the government's position is: trust us! I don't.

Other countries have passed laws that put them into compliance with WIPO and still maintain reasonable exceptions to break digital locks for valid reasons of fair use/dealing, privacy and so on.

Note: I've seen legal arguments suggesting that C-11 forbids breaking digital locks that function as access controls but does not forbid breaking digital locks that function as copy controls. In other words, it's illegal to hack a paywall so that you can read protected content, but it's not illegal to enable right-clicking to copy content to which you have legal access.

IANAL but I can already see a problem with this: if the same digital lock serves both functions, it is impossible to carry out the latter without also violating the former.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: