4 ms·
Does this ruling indirectly legitimizes DRM removal tools? I mean, without them, how can you resell a license? Then again, the EU has anti-circumvention rules
by maybird 14y ago
Does this ruling indirectly legitimizes DRM removal tools?
I mean, without them, how can you resell a license?
Then again, the EU has anti-circumvention rules similar to those in the DMCA.
- yxhuvud 14y agoNot all licenses depends on DRM.
- meric 14y agoBut some do and those can be resold.
- antidoh 14y agoSo DRM becomes anti-commerce, preventing resale, which would seem to be illegal.
- mikecane 14y agoThis is based on licenses. Even eBooks have licenses (see store's TOS). So if I buy an app from Apple's App Store and want to sell it, it seems to me Apple would be required by the Court to delete that app from my account and place it in the used buyer's account. Same for eBooks. Am I missing anything?
- flipbrad 14y agothe ramifications of this judgement are interesting for many reasons, and this is one; it's hard to see Apple being compelled to take positive action each time you sell your copy of software, but on the other hand, if you did and the licence is assigned to the buyer, does a contact now exist between apple and buyer which Apple has to uphold or face breach of contract?
- pbhjpbhj 14y ago>DRM becomes anti-commerce, preventing resale // Strictly the DRM doesn't prevent resale it prevents use. From the little I've seen I think they've erred away from suggesting their is any onus on the creator to enable the resale or indeed the reuse.
- flipbrad 14y agoIf DRM is standing in the way of lawful use, there is an (apparently never used) remedy in English law: complaining about it. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/296ZE http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/296ZE
- pbhjpbhj 14y agoInteresting but Section 296ZE(2) specifically excludes the prevention of access when it is by a "computer program" and sub-section (9) excludes works for access by private individuals at a time of their choosing. So it seems to be very narrow in scope of application - how do you know about it? I only skimmed it but doesn't it merely allow you to complain; the SoS won't necessarily take any action. Do you know what this section is directed towards? It appears to be something like forcing a company to hand over data necessary to allow a researcher to work with the companies copyright materials?? Note there's a bulletin, http://www.share-the-vision.org.uk/bulletins/bulletin_70.doc http://www.share-the-vision.org.uk/bulletins/bulletin_70.doc, from Aug 2010 where it says that section has never been applied (see also page 2 of http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file51998.pdf http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file51998.pdf).
- rmc 14y agothe EU has anti-circumvention rules similar to those in the DMCA. Oh? Didn't know that. Got a source/details/explaination/more information?
- maybird 14y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-circumvention#European_Union http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-circumvention#European_Uni...
- IsTom 14y agoWell, remember that it is "Digital Rights Management". It's the time it's about our rights. I hope it means that any DRM will be obliged to include a resale functionality.