[scott_meade]

If someone has information that they only want certain people to see, would circumventing a technological measure that controls access to that information be allowed under this bill? For example, internal documents, trade secrets and documents under NDAs?

If someone has information they only want licensed people to see, would circumventing a technological measure that controls access to that information be allowed under this bill? For example, publishers of stock market analysis which is released only to licensed subscribers.

[comex]

I am not a lawyer, but-

> If someone has information that they only want certain people to see, would circumventing a technological measure that controls access to that information be allowed under this bill? For example, internal documents, trade secrets and documents under NDAs?

Among other things, this would generally be a violation of the CFAA.

> If someone has information they only want licensed people to see, would circumventing a technological measure that controls access to that information be allowed under this bill? For example, publishers of stock market analysis which is released only to licensed subscribers.

Depends what you mean. If an unlicensed subscriber tried to gain access from scratch, then the CFAA would be applicable; if a licensed subscriber leaked large portions of the document to an unlicensed subscriber, then it would at least be a (standard) copyright violation. (If they only leaked specific bits of information, it probably wouldn't involve circumventing a technological measure, but contract law would be applicable.)

[darkarmani]

Why do you need the DMCA to protect these things?

[scott_meade]

I'm asking for clarification of the impact of this bill. Do you know the answers to those two questions off hand?

[msg]

How could you know the answer to a legal question offhand?

Is this FUD? The point of DMCA anti-circumvention is that it makes a crime out of things that were otherwise legal, not tack on charges to things that are illegal for other reasons.

FTFA:

"- It amends Section 1201 to make it clear that it is completely legal to "circumvent" if there is no copyright infringement.

"- It legalizes tools and services that enable circumvention as long as they are intended for non-infringing uses.

"- It changes Copyright Law to specify that unlocking cell phones is not copyright infringement."

Or you could read the text the bill adds to DMCA:

It is not a violation of this section to use, manu- 8 facture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise 9 traffic in any technology, product, service, device, compo- 10 nent, or part thereof that is primarily designed or pro- 11 duced for the purpose of facilitating noninfringing uses of 12 works protected under this title by circumventing a tech- 13 nological measure that effectively controls access to that 14 work, unless it is the intent of the person that uses, manu- 15 factures, imports, offers to the public, provides, or traffics 16 in the technology, product, service, device, component, or 17 part to infringe copyright or to facilitate the infringement 18 of a copyright.’’.

emphasis added by me.

[Zigurd]

Why would you expose such information in a way that it is protected only by a mechanism that the public has access to? It seems like you are asking if fixing the DMCA would remove protection for irresponsible behavior.

[pyre]

IIRC, the DMCA makes it a criminal act, whereas otherwise it might only be governed by civil law. If I'm contractually obligated to only read a stock market report myself, but I show it to a friend, do I deserve jail time, or just to get sued?

[lawnchair_larry]

Why would circumventing document DRM be illegal? Nothing good can come of that.

If it's already illegal to have the document, that is the crime. Aggravators like these create perverse incentives and invite abuse.

[nilsbunger]

That is a fascinating question. Just like breaking into a network is illegal, you want something that applies at a document-level.

It's not actually a copyright issue. Whether the DMCA (or something else) covers it, I don't know but would love to hear.

[scott_meade]

What I really should have asked: Does the provision that allows you to "circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to works" allow you to circumvent network and data center security measures? I'd expect not, but I don't see where the bill draws a line between devices (phones, game consoles, dvds) and other types of information stores.

[lawnchair_larry]

The line isn't between devices and other types of information stores, it's between something that is your own property and something that isn't.

The DMCA wouldn't make it legal for me to unlock your phone without your permission, only mine.