So, we have Apple who is paranoid about people installing legally purchased copies of its operating system on non-Apple labelled machines. Just when you thought it couldn't get any more ridiculous than that, we have a hardware company trying to prevent people from installing operating systems on its hardware. Wait, what?
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2009-02-19
The DMCA prohibits defeating a technological measure that restricts access to a copyrighted work. So, if some company or individual somewhere releases a copyrighted text, and they "encrypt" it by running it thru rot13... then yes, if they can convince a court of law that rot13 qualifies as a "technological protection measure," then it would be illegal to decrypt that document.
I don't know what the qualifications are to be considered a "technological protection measure," tho. If the DMCA includes minimum requirements, then rot13 may not meet them; if it doesn't, then it might be up to a court of law to decide if something as trivial as rot13 could reasonably be called a technological protection measure.
Obviously: IANAL
Edited 2009-10-14 22:48 UTC
Member since:2005-11-02
That means that you could use rot13 and be safe because DMCA forbids breaking crypto? Or did I missunderstand something? (I don't live in USA, so DMCA doesn't mean anything to me) "
Yes. Someone once got sued over 'decrypting' base64 encoding. I don't recall who or for what, and I cannot remember if they won in court, but it happened. A lot of people cannot afford to go to court and prove that it's a ridiculous claim, so companies can get away with this kind of thing.
Member since:2006-02-05
Member since:
2005-07-22
That means that you could use rot13 and be safe because DMCA forbids breaking crypto? Or did I missunderstand something? (I don't live in USA, so DMCA doesn't mean anything to me)