Will Rodger wrote: >It included all sorts of people traipsing up to >Capitol Hill to make sure that ordinary research and system maintenance, >among other things, would not be prosecuted.
I think our understanding of the DMCA has changed significantly since it was first introduced, and it's not clear to me that the DMCA provides the level of protection that should perhaps be there. For instance, none of the exemptions for research apply to 1201(b), the half of the DMCA that bans making circumvention devices (as opposed to 1201(a), which bans circumventing and does have a few exemptions). As far as I can tell, 1201(b) appears to be a real concern for certain types of research in this field. >OK. so that's my rap on why this law is bad but won't likely put anyone on >this list in jail. The biggest issue for researchers may be not in the DMCA's criminal provisions, but rather in its civil provisions. (i.e., money, not jailtime) And the civil aspects of the DMCA have a truly sharp sting. I spent a lot of time talking to lawyers at UC Berkeley and elsewhere about this very issue, and there appears to be a real but very-hard-to-quantify risk -- a risk to scientists that should not be lightly dismissed. Given this risk, I've decided I cannot afford to work any further in the area of copy protection as long as the uncertainty remains. And how in good conscience can I advise students working with me to work in this troubled area? I can't. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
