Security model [LWN.net]

Security model

Posted May 3, 2007 11:39 UTC (Thu) by grouch (guest, #27289)
In reply to: Security model by bojan
Parent article: EFF: 09 f9: A Legal Primer

(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;

It appears to me that all of the take-down notices should fail because their "technological measure" does NOT "effectively control[] access". As you and drag point out, they provide everything necessary to unlock the work on machines which provide everything necessary to see how that unlocking occurs. Sure doesn't look very effective to me. Looks to me like a pretty ineffective, technologically simple-minded measure.

(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

There's that "effectively controls" part, again. It's a mischaracterization, at best, and a downright lie, at worst. Or does U.S. law define "effectively" and "controls" in some way that defies common sense? Could "click here" be considered a "technological measure that effectively controls access to a work"?

(C) 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.

Ok, so all it takes is to place the number on some web site which has no marketing whatsoever. No advertisements, no sales, no commercial activity at all means that the wondrous, magical, awesomely effective number is not being marketed when displayed on that web site.

Is there no lower limit to stupidity? If this keeps up, somebody is going to pass a law proclaiming a new value of pi.

(Log in to post comments)

defining "effectively controls"

Posted May 3, 2007 11:52 UTC (Thu) by louie (subscriber, #3285) [Link]

their "technological measure" does NOT "effectively control[] access"

As I pointed out in another comment, the DMCA says that the technological measure 'effectively controls' if it 'requires the application of information... with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.' You or I may think that is a pretty terrible definition of 'effective', but that is the definition of effective the judge is going to use. And clearly, the device requires 'application of information' (aka, the key) to access the work, so for the purposes of the law, it is effective, whether we think it is effective or not.