Previous by Date |
Index by Date
Threaded Index |
Next by Date |
---|---|---|
Previous by Thread | Next by Thread |
RE: A thought about H.R. 2281 - Anti circumvention
Rick, A web site is already protected against "trespass" by Computer Crimes acts. The novelty of 2281 is that it protects a piece of digital content AFTER is has been distributed and is no longer located on the copyright owner's computer. (e.g. a digital book is sent to your computer and is protected by a program which only lets you read it twice.) Hope that clarifies this a bit for you. Laurel _________________________________________________ On Fri, 29 May 1998, Rick Anderson wrote: > Laurel Jamtgaard makes some very good points in her posting, I think. But > this one leads me to another question, or maybe just a clearer framing of > what's been bothering me all along about this issue: > > > I think of H.R. 2281's 1201(a)(1) anti-circumvention lanugage as a > > "traveling law of trespass" - the information provider is given the right > > to protect the information product it distributes in an analogous way to > > protecting a house! But with a house, there are even exceptions to the > > law of trespass for reasons of necessity. 2281 doesn't provide such > > exceptions. > > If I had written a bunch of books and were keeping them in my house, and > someone broke in and made fair use of the content of those books and then > left without bothering any of my other property, we'd all agree that that > person was acting illegally. I own the house and people aren't generally > allowed in it without my permission, whether or not they intend to do me > any harm. Now obviously, an online presence isn't the same thing as a > physical house and doesn't enjoy the same legal protections. But I think > that's the nut of the issue: *should* one's cyber-property enjoy any of > the same protections as those enjoyed by one's real property? If I've > paid for a "place" on the web, ought I to be able to protect it from > "invasion"? I think we all agree that it's okay to run a web-based > business, which means that we think it's okay for people to exercise some > degree of proprietary control over their cyber-property. But how far > should it go? We agree that it's okay to put password protections in > place, but we apparently don't think it's okay to give those protections > themselves legal protection. H.R. 2281 will make perfect sense to anyone > who sees a web site as a piece of real estate; it will be opposed by > anyone who thinks that cyberspace isn't directly analogous to physical > space and shouldn't be governed the same way. I'm still not completely > sure what I think. > > ---------------------- > Rick Anderson > Head Acquisitions Librarian > Jackson Library > UNC Greensboro > 1000 Spring Garden St. > Greensboro, NC 27402-6175
http://www.library.yale.edu/liblicense © 1996, 1997 Yale University Library |
Please read our Disclaimer E-mail us with feedback |