On 5/6/07, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
It doesn't behave like copyright? It is copyright. It's part of Title 17 of the US Code, which is called "Copyrights". And the name of the law. The Digital Millenium *Copyright* Act. The title of section 3? *Copyright* protection systems and *copyright* management information. The treaty it was created to implement? The WIPO *Copyright* Treaty.
Copyright encompasses a lot of rights beyond just copying.
Anthony
Copyright is finite the stuff we are talking about is not.
Copyright does not protect again independent creation. The stuff we are talking about does appear to.
Copyright under US law requires creativity. No evidence the DRM stuff does
Copyright has fair use clauses. The DRM protection stuff does not. It isn't copyright by any reasonable standards and the courts have not supported the suggestion that it is. If it was copyright it would quite possibly be be unconstitutional in it's current wording since it lasts longer than forever -1 day.
Additionally the name of the bill means nothing unless you are going to suggest that under UK law protesting in certain areas of London without a permit falls under the definition of "serious and organised crime"