Digital Millennium Copyright Act

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States copyright law that implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). It criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures (commonly known as digital rights management or DRM) that control access to copyrighted works. It also criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, whether or not there is actual infringement of copyright itself. In addition, the DMCA heightens the penalties for copyright infringement on the Internet. Passed on October 12, 1998, by a unanimous vote in the United States Senate and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on October 28, 1998, the DMCA amended Title 17 of the United States Code to extend the reach of copyright, while limiting the liability of the providers of on-line services for copyright infringement by their users. On May 22, 2001, the European Union passed the Copyright Directive or EUCD, which addresses some of the same issues as the DMCA. The DMCA's principal innovation in the field of copyright, the exemption from direct and indirect liability of internet service providers and other intermediaries (Title II of the DMCA), was separately addressed, and largely followed, in Europe by means of the separate Electronic Commerce Directive. (Unlike U.S. federal laws and regulations, the execution of European Union directives usually requires separate legislation by or within each of the Union's member countries.)

Digital Millennium Copyright Act

Full title

To amend title 17, United States Code, to implement the World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty and Performances and Phonograms Treaty, and for other purposes.

Acronym DMCA Enacted by the Effective October 28, 1998 Citations Public Law Pub. L. 105-304 (http://thomas.loc.gov /cgi-bin/toGPO/http: //frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin /getdoc.cgi?dbname=105_cong_public_laws& docid=f:publ304.105.pdf) Stat. 112 Stat. 2860 (1998) Codification Copyright Act of 1976 Title(s) 5 (Government Organization and and Judicial Procedure); 35 (Patents) U.S.C. sections created U.S.C. amended 17 U.S.C. §§ 101, 104, 104A, 108, 112, 114, section(s) 117, 701 Legislative history Introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R. 2281 by Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC) on July 29, 1997 Committee consideration by: House Judiciary 17 U.S.C. §§ 512, 1201–1205, 1301–1332; 28 U.S.C. § 4001 amended Employees); 17 (Copyrights); 28 (Judiciary 105th United States Congress

Contents
1 Provisions 1.1 Title I: WIPO Copyright and Performances and

4 IO Group. 1998 Major amendments None Provisions Title I: WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act DMCA Title I.5 Title V: Vessel Hull Design Protection Act 2 Anti-circumvention exemptions 3 Linking to infringing content 4 Notable court cases 4.Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act 1. George Hotz 5 Criticisms 5. v. 4. Autodesk. agreed to by the Senate on October 8.4 Effect on innovation and competition 5. 1998. YouTube. 4.3 Viacom Inc. Inc.3 Title III: Computer Maintenance Competition Assurance Act 1. 1998 (voice vote) Passed the Senate on September 17.3 Effect on research 5. N2H2 4. the WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties . v. 4. Gunter 4. 4.2 Effect on Analog Video Equipment 5.2 RealNetworks. v. House Commerce Committee (Subcommittee on Telecommunications.2 Title II: Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act 1. 4.7 Flava Works Inc. 1998 (voice vote) Signed into law by President Clinton on October 28. Inc.5 Reform and opposition 6 See also 7 References 8 External links Committee (Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property).4 Title IV: Miscellaneous Provisions 1.8 Ouellette v. 1998 (unanimous consent) Reported by the joint conference committee on October 8. DVD Copy Control Association. Inc. Veoh Networks. Google Inc. 1998 ({{{passedvote3}}}) and by the House on October 12.9 Sony v. Inc. Inc.5 Vernor v.1 Edelman v. and Consumer Protection) Passed the House on August 4.6 Lenz v. 4.1 Takedown Notice 5. v. Universal Music Corp. Trade. Viacom International Inc.

infringing. The title contains other limitations and exemptions. including certain statutory licenses. OCILLA also facilitates issuing of subpoenas against OSPs to provide their users' identity. One portion includes works covered by several treaties in U.html) to add a sui generis protection for boat hull designs.cornell.html) of the copyright title so that those repairing computers could make certain temporary.html) through 1332 (http://www.law. Peak Computer. These provisions changed the remedies for the circumvention of copy-prevention systems (also called "technical protection measures") and required that all analog video recorders have support for a specific form of copy prevention created by Macrovision (now Rovi Corporation) built in. The second portion is often known as the DMCA anti-circumvention provisions. see WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act. 991 F. including ISPs) against copyright infringement liability.law. including for research and reverse engineering in specified situations. Added provisions to assist libraries with keeping phonorecords of sound recordings. Boat hull designs were not considered covered under copyright law because they [1][2] are useful articles whose form cannot be cleanly separated from their function.2d 511 (9th Cir. adopted at the WIPO Diplomatic Conference in December 1996. v. OSPs must adhere to and qualify for certain prescribed safe harbor guidelines and promptly block access to alleged infringing material (or remove such material from their systems) when they receive notification of an infringement claim from a copyright holder or the copyright holder's agent. For further analysis of this portion of the Act and of cases under it. or defenses.S. Title III: Computer Maintenance Competition Assurance Act DMCA Title III modified section 117 (http://www. section 1201(c) of the title clarified that the title does not change the underlying substantive copyright infringement rights. the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act ("OCILLA"). . The treaties have two major portions.S. in fact.cornell. limited copies while working on a computer. creates a safe harbor for online service providers (OSPs.Implementation Act. amends U.cornell. Title V: Vessel Hull Design Protection Act DMCA Title V added sections 1301 (http://www. OCILLA also includes a counternotification provision that offers OSPs a safe harbor from liability to their users when users claim that the material in question is not.edu/uscode/17/1301. Title II: Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act DMCA Title II. Added provisions to facilitate distance education. Added ephemeral copy for broadcasters provisions. However. copy prevention laws and gave the title its name. It reversed the precedent set in MAI Systems Corp. remedies. copyright law to comply with the WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. provided they meet specific requirements. Added provisions relating to collective bargaining and the transfer of movie rights. 1993). Inc..edu/uscode/17/1332.edu/uscode/17/117. giving Macrovision an effective monopoly on the analog video-recording copy-prevention market. Title IV: Miscellaneous Provisions DMCA Title IV contains an assortment of provisions: Clarified and added to the duties of the Copyright Office.law.

) Computer programs that enable wireless telephone handsets to execute software applications.gov/title17/92chap12. when they have been lawfully obtained.gov/1201/) . investigating. are: Motion pictures on DVDs that are lawfully made and acquired and that are protected by the Content Scrambling System when circumvention is accomplished solely in order to accomplish the incorporation of short portions of motion pictures into new works for the purpose of criticism or comment. issued in July 2010.C. where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications. (A new exemption in 2010. that enable used wireless telephone handsets to connect to a wireless telecommunications network. (Revised from a similar exemption approved in 2006. Exemption proposals are submitted by the public to the Registrar of Copyrights. (A new exemption in 2010.) Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete.) Computer programs. if: The information derived from the security testing is used primarily to promote the security of the owner or operator of a computer. 1201(a)(1) (http://www. and after a process of hearings and public comments. computer system. 17 U. based on a similar . the final rule is recommended by the Registrar and issued by the Librarian. similar to a previous educational exemption. and where the person engaging in circumvention believes and has reasonable grounds for believing that circumvention is necessary to fulfill the purpose of the use in the following instances: Educational uses by college and university professors and by college and university film and media studies students.Anti-circumvention exemptions In addition to the safe harbors and exemptions the statute explicitly provides.S. The exemption rules are revised every three years. Consequently. Exemptions are granted when it is shown that access-control technology has had a substantial adverse effect on the ability of people to make non-infringing uses of copyrighted works. the exemptions issued in the prior rulemakings. A dongle shall be considered obsolete if it is no longer manufactured or if a replacement or repair is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace. and The information derived from the security testing is used or maintained in a manner that does not facilitate copyright infringement or a violation of applicable law.copyright. (A new exemption in 2010.) Video games accessible on personal computers and protected by technological protection measures that control access to lawfully obtained works. or computer network. in 2000. Documentary filmmaking. The current administratively-created exemptions (http://www. when circumvention is initiated by the owner of the copy of the computer program solely in order to connect to a wireless telecommunications network and access to the network is authorized by the operator of the network. Exemptions expire after three years and must be resubmitted for the next rulemaking cycle. Noncommercial videos. with computer programs on the telephone handset. when circumvention is accomplished solely for the purpose of good faith testing for. in the form of firmware or software.html#1201) requires that the Librarian of Congress issue exemptions from the prohibition against circumvention of access-control technology.copyright. 2003 and 2006 are no longer valid. or correcting security flaws or vulnerabilities. (A renewed exemption from 2006.

but was not renewed in 2006. the 2000 "literary works including computer programs" exemption was limited to "Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete" and this exemption was renewed in both 2006 and 2010. In 2003. The 2000 filtering exemption was revised and renewed in 2003. Linking to infringing content The law is currently unsettled with regard to websites that contain links to infringing material. seeking a Declaratory judgment to affirm his first amendment rights when reverse engineering the censorware product of defendant N2H2 in case he intended to publish the finding. or links from websites whose sole purpose is to circumvent copyright protection by [4] linking to copyrighted material. The 2006 exemption for wireless handsets connecting to wireless networks was revised in 2010 to specify used handsets and require authorization from the wireless network operator. protected by access control mechanisms that fail to permit access because of malfunction.exemption approved in 2003. Another exemption for wireless handsets was introduced [3] in 2010 specific to interoperability software on the phone itself. (A renewed exemption from 2006. The 2003 exemption for text readers of ebooks was renewed in both 2006 and 2010. One is when the owner of a website has already been issued an injunction against posting infringing material on their website and then links to the same material in an attempt to circumvent the injunction." (revised and limited in 2003 and again in 2006). documentary or non-profit use. Notable court cases Edelman v. . The 2006 exemption for sound recordings allowed after security flaws were found in a copy protection system on some Sony CDs was not renewed in 2010. The 2003 exemption for obsolete software and video game formats was renewed in 2006 but was not renewed in 2010. however. six in 2006 and 2010. There have been no cases in the US where a website owner has been found liable for linking [citation needed] to copyrighted material outside of the above narrow circumstances. a computer researcher at Berkman Center for Internet and Society. the Office exempted (a) "Compilations consisting of lists of websites blocked by filtering software applications" (renewed in 2003 but not renewed in 2006). N2H2 In July 2002. In 2000. which the court granted. or obsoleteness. An exemption covering the audiovisual works included in the educational library of a college or university’s film or media studies department was not renewed in 2010. and (b) "Literary works. for educational. including computer programs and databases. N2H2 filed a motion to dismiss.) Literary works distributed in e-book format when all existing e-book editions of the work (including digital text editions made available by authorized entities) contain access controls that prevent the enabling either of the book’s read-aloud function or of screen readers that render the text into a specialized format. based on a similar exemption approved in 2003. damage. This exemption was replaced with an exemption on DVDs protected by the Content Scrambling System when circumvention is for the purpose of criticism or comment using short sections. Another area involves linking to software or devices which are designed to circumvent DRM (digital rights management) devices. there have been a few lower-court decisions which have ruled against linking in some narrowly prescribed circumstances. four in 2003. American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on the behalf of Benjamin Edelman.) The Copyright Office approved two exemptions in 2000.

Inc. Veoh Networks. The court did uphold the ruling that YouTube could not be held liable based on "general knowledge" that users on its site were infringing copyright.S. v. v. YouTube. On June 23. 2012. U. Viacom Inc. DVD Copy Control Association. and instead ruled that Viacom had presented enough evidence against YouTube to warrant a trial. Google relied on the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act's "safe harbor" provision to shield [6] them from liability. Inc. v. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as soon as [8] possible. stating that "Veoh has simply established a system whereby software automatically processes user-submitted content and recasts it in a format that is readily accessible to its users. Inc. as well as breaking [5] Real's licensing agreement with the MPAA's Content Scrambling System. District Judge Louis Stanton granted summary judgment in favor of [7] YouTube. DVD Copy Control Association. IO Group argued that since Veoh transcoded user uploaded videos to Flash format it became a direct infringer and the materials were under their direct control.. Inc. v. Inc.S. allowing users to copy DVDs and store them on a harddrive.000 unauthorized clips of Viacom's entertainment programming. In August 2009. v. The court held that YouTube is protected by the safe harbor of the DMCA.S.S. Inc. Inc.RealNetworks. YouTube. [10] IO Group alleged that Veoh was responsible District Court for California's Northern District. District Court for the Southern District of New York. and the case should not have been thrown out in summary judgement. Viacom filed a lawsuit against YouTube and its corporate parent Google for copyright infringement seeking more than $1 billion in damages. But Veoh does not itself . IO Group. Viacom has said that it will appeal before the U. Inc.000 times between the dates June 1 and June [11] 22. the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated Judge Louis Stanton's ruling. The complaint was filed in the U. the DVD Copy Control Association won a lawsuit against RealNetworks for violating copyright law in selling its RealDVD software.. The ruling judge disagreed with the argument. The DVD Copy Control Association claimed that Real violated the DMCA by circumventing anti-piracy measures ARccOS Protection and RipGuard. 2007. Inc. v. Veoh Networks. Viacom claims the popular videosharing site was engaging in "massive intentional copyright infringement" for making available a contended 160. 2010. On June 23. thereby disqualifying them for DMCA safe harbor protection. Inc. Veoh is a Flash video site relying on user contributed content. filed a complaint against Veoh Networks. On March 13. Main article: IO Group. On April 5. Main article: Viacom International Inc. The case will be sent back to the [9] District Court in New York to be tried. 2006 IO Group. in the U. Inc. Google Inc. Veoh preselects the software parameters for the process from a range of default values set by the thirdparty software. for copyright infringement by allowing videos owned by IO Group to be accessed through Veoh's online service without permission over 40. Main article: RealNetworks.

Universal Music Group. the preempted the seller from his rights under the first-sale doctrine.actively participate or supervise the uploading of files. holding that "a software user is a licensee rather than an owner of a copy where the copyright owner (1) specifies that the user is granted a license. it blamed the litigation as one of harbor" provision. California ruled that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material. On February 25. which owned the copyrights to the song. a federal district judge in to sell used software he bought at a garage sale. ordered YouTube to remove the video enforcing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act." Lenz v. In 2007. Inc. v. Universal Music Corp. Instead. as required by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act—to see whether Universal planned to sue Lenz for infringement.S. v. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose.edu/uscode/17/512.cornell. video files are uploaded through an automated process which is initiated entirely at the volition of Veoh's users. Vernor v. Flava Works Inc. v. The court found that the defendant had knowledge of its users infringing activity and also failed to . After numerous DMCA takedown notices in response to his eBay listings. (2) significantly restricts the user’s ability to transfer the software. Gunter the court denied the defendant safe harbour protection under DMCA 17 U. Judge Fogel issued a ruling rejecting several of Universal's affirmative [18] defenses. Inc. U. [13] the causes of its preparing to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy and its subsequent sale to Qlipso. claiming the music company had acted in bad faith by ordering removal of a video that represented fair [17] use of the song.S. Main article: Vernor v. holding that the defendant's video-sharing web site complied and was entitled to the protection of the statute's "safe [12] Even though Veoh won the court case. Stephanie Lenz. Pennsylvania made a home video of her 13-month-old son dancing to "Let's Go Crazy" and posted a 29-second video on the video-sharing site YouTube. Gunter Main article: Flava Works Inc. a writer and editor from Gallitzin. In August 2008.law. Lenz then sued Universal Music in California for her legal costs. 2010. and demanded that it be restored. Autodesk. Washington State dismissed Autodesk's argument that the software's license agreement [15] In September 2010. Main article: Lenz v. Timothy S. Vernor sued Autodesk in August 2007 alleging that Autodesk abused the DMCA and disrupted his right [14] In May 2008. Autodesk. Universal Music Corp.html) . § 512 (http://www. Gunter In the case of Flava Works Inc. and (3) [16] imposes notable use restrictions. US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. Lenz notified YouTube immediately that her video was within the scope of fair use. YouTube complied after six weeks—not two weeks. Nor does it preview or select the files before the upload is completed." The Court has granted the Veoh's motion for summary judgment. Four months after the video was originally uploaded. on the basis of the DMCA. including the defense that Lenz suffered no damages.C.

he had purchased the product. competing business made up over half (57%) of the notices Google has received. In the NTSC video standard. is designed to thwart users' attempts to reproduce content via analog cables. Main article: Ouellette v. [24] quoting results from a 2005 study by Californian academics Laura Quilter and Jennifer Urban [25] Takedown notices targeting a based on data from the Chilling Effects clearinghouse. George Hotz In January 2011. After three months. distorting the video image regardless of whether the recording is original or a copy. Sony Computer Entertainment sued George Hotz over violating the Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as well as the Federal Fraud and Abuse Act due to [21] Hotz argued that because facilitating consumers to jailbreak their PlayStation 3 consoles. blank lines (vertical blanking intervals) that the user cannot see are used for functions like closed captioning." Sony v. When a DVD is played through an analog video cable and recorded using a VCR. Criticisms Takedown Notice Google asserted misuse of the DMCA in a filing concerning New Zealand's copyright act. Rovi Corporation uses these blank lines to implement its ACP [28] technology. In this case of Ouellette v. . Viacom International Inc. the court found it impossible to use the DMCA takedown provisions as a foundation for liability. The court found that the safe harbor provision serves "to limit the liability of internet service providers. Viacom International Inc. Viacom International Inc. The technology works by adding additional lines to the video signal.prevent future infringing activity. This also included an injunction against George [22][23] Hotz. Rovi’s [27] ACP technology will distort the copy partially or completely. George Hotz Main article: Sony Computer Entertainment America v. the company [26] said. Many claim that the technology has led to signal issues with VCRs and analog video equipment. and more than one-third (37%). not to create liability that could not [20] otherwise be imposed under existing law independent of the DMCA.. "were not valid copyright claims. barring him from hacking anymore Sony products. Ouellette v. The implementation of ACP has been ill-regarded by some video enthusiasts. Some VCRs misread the encryption used to prevent copying. Sony and Hotz decided to settle out of court. As such the plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction [19] was granted ." Effect on Analog Video Equipment Analog Copy Protection (ACP). the encryption technology created by Rovi Corporation (Formerly Macrovision). he had the right to do with it as he pleased. the court denied plaintiff's attempt to find liability for Youtube and Myspace's takedowns of the plaintiff's homemade videos. Despite potential fair use claims.

On one or more accounts. Reform and opposition There are efforts in Congress to modify the Act. the encryption used by ACP blocks analog transmission.The DMCA has been criticized for forcing all producers of analog video equipment to support the proprietary copy protection technology of Rovi Corporation. an activity legal in both Russia and the United States. [34] and security consultants such as Niels Professor Edward Felten and students at Princeton). under the DMCA. in a well-known instance. known in early drafts as the Security Systems and Standards Certification Act (SSSCA). which together make it a useful strategy for Open Source organizations. he developed The Advanced anti-DRM measures. since an argument can be made that any cryptanalytic research violates. would have dealt with the devices used to access digital content and would have been even more restrictive than the DMCA. who has declined to publish information about vulnerabilities he discovered in an Intel secure-computing scheme because of his concern about being arrested under the DMCA [35] when he travels to the US. Rick Boucher. such as students of cryptanalysis (including. rendering the Slingbox unusable. Effect on innovation and competition In at least one court case. However. students have not been able to cite and [30] record cable sources properly due to ACP restrictions. Effect on research Main article: Digital rights management The DMCA has had an impact on the worldwide cryptography research community. the DMCA. whereas those forced to implement it receive neither profit nor [29] compensation.e. legitimate users. if it had passed. The arrest of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov in 2001. some criticize the implementation of ACP as a violation of their fair use rights. generate attorney fee awards. and can notices. [citation needed] This benefits Rovi implement the corporation's proprietary technology. was a highly publicized example of the law's use to prevent or penalize development of [31] While working for ElcomSoft in Russia. A prominent bill related to the DMCA is the Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act (CBDTPA). This bill. the DMCA has been used by Open Source software projects to defend against conversion of software (i. a software application allowing users to strip usage restriction information [32] from restricted e-books. Sklyarov was arrested in the United States after presenting a speech at DEF CON and [33] The DMCA has also been cited as chilling to subsequently spent nearly a month in jail. for alleged infringement of the DMCA. eBook Processor. Paradoxically. or might violate. is leading one of these efforts by introducing the Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act (DMCRA). Additionally ACP blocks the use of recording for educational purposes. a Democratic congressman from Virginia. Additionally. it is not legal in the United States to provide such a tool. license violations) that involved removal of copyright [36] This defense can be used even without timely copyright registration. a commercial [citation needed] The producers of video equipment are forced by law to support and firm. Ferguson. A recently developed TV-streaming product called the Slingbox uses analog signals to convey video from television to a mobile device. . Corporation financially.

impedes competition. DMCA: 1. et al. [39] 4. Chamberlain v. jeopardizes fair use. Static Control Components Murphy v. shelved indefinitely) Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) (introduced in 2011. the "No Electronic Theft" Proposed US legislation BALANCE Act. Inc. .. Inc.On the tenth anniversary of the DMCA. Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studios. and journalists. Reimerdes DMCA damages cases Stockwire Research Group. Power Ventures. interferes with computer intrusion laws. such as in its use against Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov. and enforcing walled gardens around the iPod. the Electronic Frontier Foundation documented [37] They document that the harmful consequences of the anti-circumvention provisions. Lebed. stifles free expression. See also Economic concepts Protectionism Related US laws Copyright Term Extension Act (1998) Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act (1995) Inducement rule NET Act. shelved indefinitely) Related international law Bill C-60 (Canada — proposed) Bill C-61 (Canada — proposed) Bill C-32 (Canada — proposed) DADVSI (France — Loi sur le Droit Proposed international law Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement DMCA anti-circumvention cases 321 Studios v. 2. DMCA notice-and-takedown issues Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) (more information about the DMCA 512 takedown provisions) Lenz v. Millennium Radio Group LLC Dmitry Sklyarov in United States v. Inc. [38] and garage door openers. et al. v. Benefit Authors without Limiting Advancement or Net Consumer Expectations Act of 2003 Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act (INDUCE) (introduced 2004) Pirate Act (introduced 2004) Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act (introduced 2003 & 2005) Digital Transition Content Security Act (introduced 2005) FAIR USE Act (introduced in 2007) Shelved US Legislation PROTECT IP Act (introduced in 2011. Inc. such as blocking aftermarket competition in toner cartridges. Lexmark Int'l v. 3. Universal Music Corp. ElcomSoft and Sklyarov Universal v. v. Skylink Facebook. Princeton Professor Edward Felten.

Oct.cnet.com/Viacom-sues-Googleover-YouTubeclips/2100-1030_3-6166668. and are capable of existing independently of.gov/1201/2003 /index. such design incorporates pictorial.. Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works at http://www.10) . ^ See U. ^ Sandoval."). 2010). 07-Civ-2103 (LLS).copyright. graphic.S. the utilitarian aspects of the article.html. The Register of Copyrights. shall be considered a pictorial. 7. 2006-09-12. 1997 ("It is a long-held view of the Office that a gap exists in legal protection for the designs of useful articles.pdf) (S.Y. ^ Sandoval. Committee on the Judiciary.cnet. .at http://www.") 2.webtvwire.D. Oct.com /8301-1023_3-10307921-93.com.S. http://www. at http://www.cnet.html.com /press/pdf/msj_decision.gov/1201/2006 /index.N. et al. the design of a useful article. 5. Nos. Consequently. Greg (2009-08-11). 27.com /8301-1023_3-10307921-93.cnet.html) ..html?tag=nw. Jul. U. June 24.html) .R. graphic. 2010. graphic and sculptural works" as "Such works shall include works of artistic craftsmanship insofar as their form but not their mechanical or utilitarian aspects are concerned. v. ^ "Linking to infringing content is probably illegal in the US" (http://www. Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works. before the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property. as defined in this section. Retrieved 2006-10-12.webtvwire. they often can be copied with impunity. or sculptural work only if.gov /1201/anticirc.com/Viacom-sues-Googleover-YouTubeclips/2100-1030_3-6166668..copyright. Copyright Office.cnet. ^ "Vessel Hull Design Protection Act of 1997 (H. Retrieved 2011-11-12.com/linkingto-infringing-content-is-probably-illegalin-the-us/.S.html) . YouTube. Retrieved 2011-11-12. 27.com 4.. WebTVWire. et al. Existing bodies of federal intellectual property law do not provide appropriate and practical coverage for such designs.gov /docs/hr2696. "Google defeats Viacom in landmark copyright case" (http://news. while state law is largely preempted in this area. 8. while considerable investment and creativity may go into the creation of innovative designs.cnet. 2010). 2696)" (http://www. U. 07-Civ-3582 (LLS) Opinion and Order (http://www. Copyright Office. 2003.html .S. News.com. 3.copyright.d'Auteur et les Droits Voisins dans la Société de l'Information) Digital Economy Act 2010 (United Kingdom) EU Copyright Directive (European Union) Protection of Broadcasts and Broadcasting Organizations Treaty (proposed) References 1. Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works. 2006. Inc. Greg (June 23.gov/1201/. 2007-03-13. http://news. 26. Copyright Office. or sculptural features that can be identified separately from. ^ Viacom Int'l Inc.copyright. 2000.S. 6. Nov. Rulemaking on Exemptions from Prohibition on Circumvention of Technological Measures that Control Access to Copyrighted Works. http://news. Copyright Office (http://www. Statement of MaryBeth Peters.C. ^ 17 U. and only to the extent that.com /linking-to-infringing-content-is-probablyillegal-in-the-us/) . 23. "RealNetworks loses critical ruling in RealDVD case" (http://news.copyright.cnet. October 28.10. News. at U. ^ "Viacom sues Google over YouTube clips" (http://news. 101 (defining "Pictorial.html?tag=nw.google.

http://www. 2008 (2008-08-27).ars.).ars) . 12. http://www. Retrieved 2011-11-12. "No.html) .com.org /entry/test-for-web-video-veoh-facescopyright-suit. 2006). Retrieved 2011-11-12.com/publications /article/171852/appeals-court-gives-viacomsecond-shot-at-youtube.ars. Dist. 22.dmitryshapiro. http://www. ^ Ali. Nilay Patel. A Test of Web Video" (http://online.sfgate. officially sues Geohot and fail0verflow over PS3 jailbreak (http://www.joystiq.pdf" ^ Grady. 10.com.. (27 July 2011). "Court smacks Autodesk. http://arstechnica. Nate (2010-09-10). 14.mediapost.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/20 /MNU412FKRL. "Veoh Faces Copyright Suit. Arstechnica. ^ Lee. you don't own it: Court upholds EULAs.joystiq.com/techpolicy/news/2010/09/the-end-of-used-majorruling-upholds-tough-software-licenses. "Autodesk sued for $10 million after invoking DMCA to stop eBay resales" (http://arstechnica.html?mod=rss_what s_news_technology. (2008-05-23).com/article /SB115154757274993889.DTL.com.com/tech-policy/news/2008 /05/court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-rightto-sell-used-software.gamespot.paidcontent.com/2008/08 /27/transcoding-is-not-a-crime-says-courtin-veoh-porn-case/.pdf) . "Google submission on TCF Draft ISP Copyright Code of Practice" .5& case=3753744983787595468&scilh=0) ^ Sony follows up.25. The Wall Street Journal. ^ Ouellette v. 19. affirms right to sell used software" (http://arstechnica. ^ "Sony and PlayStation 3 jailbreaker George Hotz settle out of court" (http://www. Court rule in favour of plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction.com/publications /article/171852/appeals-court-gives-viacomsecond-shot-at-youtube. "Transcoding Is Not A Crime.google.cnet. Kevin J. TechCrunch.html?mod=rss_what s_news_technology) . ^ Carolyn Dalton and Antoine Aubert (6 March 2009).typepad.S. "Memorandum opinion" (http://docs. Court.gamespot.ars) . 20.com/tech-policy/news/2008 /05/court-smacks-autodesk-affirms-rightto-sell-used-software. 18.com/cases/federal/districtcourts/illinois/ilndce/1:2010cv06517/248465 /77/0. 23. D.com /scholar_case?q=Ouellette+v. Retrieved 16. San Francisco Chronicle.com /software/news/2007/09/autodesk-sued-for10-million-after-invoking-dmca-to-stop-ebayresales. Viacom. http://online. Retrieved 21 November 2011.wsj. http://www.justia.org/entry/testfor-web-video-veoh-faces-copyright-suit) . Wendy (April 6. Timothy B.+Viacom& hl=en&as_sdt=2. ^ Delaney.2. Retrieved 2011-11-12.ars.S. ^ "Sony/Hotz settlement details surface" (http://www. Rafat (2006-06-28). 2011-11-12. http://arstechnica.com/article /SB115154757274993889.com/2011/01/12/sonyfollows-up-officially-sues-geohotand-fail0verflow-over-ps/) . paidContent. Says Court In Veoh Porn Case" (http://www. ^ Anderson.html. ^ posted on August 27th. 2012). http://www.html) . Retrieved 2011-11-12. Engadget (2011-01-12).sfgate.order.html) .com /the_prior_art/files/Lenz. U..com/software/news/2007 /09/autodesk-sued-for-10-million-afterinvoking-dmca-to-stop-ebay-resales. http://www. threatens digital resale" (http://arstechnica.com/techpolicy/news/2010/09/the-end-of-used-majorruling-upholds-tough-software-licenses. Retrieved June 23.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/20 /MNU412FKRL.com/cgi-bin /article.com/cases/federal/districtcourts/illinois/ilndce/1:2010cv06517/248465 /77/0. ^ Davis. http://news. 13. cnet news (U.engadget.techcrunch. "Woman can sue over YouTube clip de-posting" (http://www. Retrieved 2008-08-25.com /2008/08/27/transcoding-is-not-a-crimesays-court-in-veoh-porn-case/) . 15.DTL) .com /8301-31001_3-20008636-261. ^ Egelko.ars) .wsj.9. (June 29.com /blog/?p=160) ^ Cheng.pdf.justia.com /cgi-bin/article. Retrieved on 2011-02-16.com/2011/04/11/sonyand-playstation-3-jailbreaker-georgehotz-settle-out-of-cou/.com /news/6308347.techcrunch. "Test For Web Video? Veoh Faces Copyright Suit" (http://www. http://docs. Jacqui (2007-09-13). http://arstechnica.html.com /news/6308347. Retrieved April 7. Montana (2011) (http://scholar. Bob. ^ "http://thepriorart. 2012. John F. ^ [1] (http://www. 21. /8301-31001_3-20008636-261. 24. 17. "Appeals Court Gives Viacom Second Shot at YouTube" (http://www. Arstechnica.com/2011/04/11/sonyand-playstation-3-jailbreaker-georgehotz-settle-out-of-cou/) . 2010. 11.paidcontent.mediapost. Arstechnica.html.

htm. http://www. Retrieved on 2007-02-26 ^ Ann Harrison (2001-08-13). External links Works related to Digital Millennium Copyright Act at Wikisource H. 27.wired.decoderpro.html) . "Sklyarov: A Huge Sigh of Release" (http://www. ISBN 1-57392-889-5. Berlin: Prometheus Books. Retrieved 2011-11-12.org/wp/unintendedconsequences-under-dmca.nz/content /ebc0a1f5-6c04-48e5-9215-ef96d06898c0. 28.pdf) .com.eff.pdf) (PDF format) Title 17 of the U. http://tcf.copyright.org/issues/analog-hole vertical blanking interval.00. 33. p. http://www.gov/loc.25. 38.wired.S.com/news/236.pdf) .nz/pcworld/pcw.net /k/docket/395. Retrieved 2009-03-19.co.htm) 2002-01-07.securityfocus.techtarget.eff. ^ Farhad Manjoo. http://www. Jessica (2000). Retrieved 2009-10-14. ^ "ACP" (http://www.R.nz/content /ebc0a1f5-6c04-48e5-9215-ef96d06898c0.00. Retrieved 2011-11-12.htm) .com/definition /0. Retrieved 2009-10-14.law. http://www. New Zealand PCWorld. Digital Copyright. Retrieved 2011-11-12. ^ "Google submission hammers section 92A" (http://pcworld.uscongress/legislation.org /wp/unintended-consequences-under-dmca) . DMCA U.edu/documents/512RepExecSum_out. Adobe.com/aboutadobe /pressroom/pressreleases/200108 /elcomsoftqa.securityfocus.edu/uscode/17/) .com/products /content_producers/protect/acp.cmr.sid9_gci213677. 30. http://www.com.eff. ^ RIAA challenges SDMI attack (http://cryptome.org/node/19) .cybercrime. Wired. ^ "Jacobsen v Katzer: Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgement and Denying Defendants Motion for Partial Summary Judgement" (http://www.html.htm.cmr) (PDF).pdf. ^ vertical blanking interval "Analog Hole" (http://www.eff.html) .com/products /content_producers/protect/acp.edu/documents /512Rep-ExecSum_out.decoderpro. ^ "vertical blanking interval" (http://whatis. /Sklyarovindictment. "Video crypto standard cracked?" (http://www.rovicorp.cybercrime.org. "Efficient Process or 「Chilling Effects」? Takedown Notices Under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act . http://www. http://www.com/news/236) .usc. Apple [3] (http://www.org/node/19. Code (http://www. http://whatis. Retrieved 2011-11-12. 2281 (http://hdl.adobe.adobe.com.com/definition /0.htm) . 29. http://www. Litman. 2010-03.gov. OdioWorks v.com/politics/law/news /2001/08/45879.publicknowledge. http://mylaw. 208.g.nsf /feature /93FEDCEF6636CF90CC25757A0072B4B7) . 26.com/politics /law/news/2001/08/45879) .net/k/docket/395. ^ "analog off" (http://www. 34. ^ "First Indictment Under Digital Millennium Copyright Act Returned Against Russian National" (http://www. 2009-03-16. Securityfocus.pdf.nz/pcworld/pcw.gov /Sklyarovindictment.rovicorp. (http://tcf.org/wp/unintendedconsequences-under-dmca) ^ e..techtarget.gov 32.co. Cybercrime. 35. http://pcworld. ^ "Adobe FAQ: ElcomSoft legal background" (http://www. 36. Copyright Office summary of the DMCA (http://www.org/cases/odioworks-v-apple) ^ "Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years under the DMCA" (http://www.org.info/sdmi-attack..S. 39. Electronic Frontier Foundation. http://www.html.sid9_gci213677. Retrieved 2010-05-29.com/aboutadobe /pressroom/pressreleases/200108 /elcomsoftqa.loc.nsf/feature /93FEDCEF6636CF90CC25757A0072B4B7.usc.eff.eff. ^ Laura Quilter and Jennifer Urban (2005).publicknowledge.cornell. Cornell Law School Cybertelecom's DMCA information and background material .gov/legislation /dmca. 31. 37.org/issues/analog-hole) . ^ [2] (https://www.Summary Report" (http://mylaw.105hr2281) .

php?title=Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act& oldid=493736376" Categories: 1998 in law 1998 in the United States Computer law United States federal copyright legislation United States federal criminal legislation 105th United States Congress History of the Internet Internet in the United States Hardware restrictions This page was last modified on 21 May 2012 at 22:46.pdf) Media Copyrights Law (http://www.htm) A citizen's guide to the DMCA (http://www. a clearinghouse of DMCA 512 notices and cease and desist letters Info on Dealing with Digital Copyrights Infringement including filing DMCA Notices (http://www.org/guide/legal/copyright /citizens_legal_guide_digital_millenium_copyright_act_dmca) ChillingEffects.in) Retrieved from "http://en.org/ip/dmca.wikipedia.org/) .medialaw.newmediarights. additional terms may apply.. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Universal DMCA lawsuit (http://tcattorney.cybertelecom.org/w/index. See Terms of use for details.php) Interview of Marcia Hoffman from the EFF on Lenz v.org/issues /dmca) Unintended Consequences: Ten Years under the DMCA . The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) page on the DMCA (http://www.typepad.org (http://chillingeffects. Inc.EFF (http://www.com/copyrights/dealing-with-copyright-infringement.html) . Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation. .html) Seth Finkelstein.(http://www.org/files /DMCAUnintended10.eff. a non-profit organization.marketingdock.eff. How To Win (DMCA) Exemptions And Influence Policy (http://www.com/digital_millennium_copyri/2007/08/post.eff.org /IP/DMCA/finkelstein_on_dmca.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful