Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Jul 2012 19:15 UTC, submitted by tupp
Thread beginning with comment 525092
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I think it is wrong (though not necessarily illegal) for publishers to deny fair use rights using DRM.
I never said anything about rightness or wrongness of that so I do not see what you're disagreeing with me about. I only said that it is not illegal or in violation of this ruling for software to employ DRM and therefore be unable to be resold, and that is a fact, nothing you can disagree with.
WereCatf,
"I only said that it is not illegal or in violation of this ruling for software to employ DRM and therefore be unable to be resold, and that is a fact, nothing you can disagree with."
I wouldn't be surprised if it was illegal in some jurisdictions. Also the DMCA has provisions for some small yet significant exceptions, and in those cases, our fair use rights are arguably being breached. I'm not going to assert what is legal, who knows what our rights really are any more.
I'm surprised to hear you say that there's "nothing you can disagree with"...I beg to differ, I reserve the right to disagree with whatever I please
Edited 2012-07-04 03:55 UTC





Member since:
2011-01-28
WereCatf,
I really don't understand the loophole he's trying to describe either... it seems to be a pretty clear cut case of copyright violation to me. It's strange to suggest that transferring software would somehow bust copyrights.
I do disagree with one of your earlier posts though. I think it is wrong (though not necessarily illegal) for publishers to deny fair use rights using DRM. What's the point in having rights if we're not able to practice them?