Re: [DMCA_Discuss] Fwd: IT: DMCA Exemption for censorware renewed!
"Dr. John Raymond Baker" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.dmca-activists |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <005f01c39e21$2e7959c0$6401a8c0@yourtrespassing> |
What can I say, but SETH ROCKS and RULES !!!! :) dr. john ----- Original Message ----- From: "Seth Finkelstein" <[email protected]> To: "Seth Johnson" <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 4:17 PM Subject: [DMCA_Discuss] Fwd: IT: DMCA Exemption for censorware renewed! > Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 16:57:24 -0500 > From: Seth Finkelstein > To: "Seth Finkelstein's InfoThought list" > Subject: IT: Victory - DMCA Exemption for censorware renewed! > > For the past several months, I have been working on advocating > for DMCA exemptions, in particular the exemption for censorware. Today, > (Oct 28) the Copyright Office released its ruling on DMCA exemptions. The > censorware exemption was one of only four granted, out of all proposed. > The Register has attributed that exemption primarily to *ME*! > > More info: > > http://www.copyright.gov/1201/ > http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/librarian_statement_01.html > http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/registers-recommendation.pdf > > My testimony: http://sethf.com/anticensorware/hearing_dc.php > > From The Recommendation of the Register of Copyrights: > > The Register's recommendation in favor of this exemption is based > primarily on the evidence introduced in the comments and testimony by > one person, Seth Finkelstein, a non-lawyer participating on his own > behalf. In addition to identifying a class of works that related to > the specific facts presented, he identified the qualitative nature of > the noninfringing uses for which circumvention was necessary and > generally identified the technological measure which controlled access > to this class. There was no dispute that the lists of Internet > locations blocked by filtering software are generally encrypted or > otherwise protected by an access control measure. The remedy sought > was causally related to the noninfringing uses that are necessary to > conduct research, comment and criticism on the filtering software at > issue. Mr. Finkelstein also anticipated objections to the exemption > and proved that available alternatives to the exemption were > insufficient to remedy the adverse effect caused by the > prohibition. The insufficiency of alternatives was supported by > testimony and demonstrative evidence at the hearing in California by > James Tyre. Finally, Mr. Finkelstein's succinct initial comment > addressed the statutory requirements and thoughtfully analyzed each of > the statutory factors required to be considered in this rulemaking. > > -- > Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer [email protected] http://sethf.com > Anticensorware Investigations - http://sethf.com/anticensorware/ > Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/ > > _______________________________________________ > Infothought mailing list > http://sethf.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/infothought > _______________________________________________ > > > ------------------------ > http://www.anti-dmca.org > ------------------------ > > DMCA_Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.microshaft.org/mailman/listinfo/dmca_discuss > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.530 / Virus Database: 325 - Release Date: 10/23/2003