Good news everyone! It *looks like we made it*. I'd like to share this victory video with you https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SEwQRPtUz4&feature=youtu.be&t=2m13s
The White House petition<https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7>to make unlocking phones legal has surpassed the 100,000 signatures necessary<http://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/02/21/petition-to-make-unlocking-phones-legal-again-passes-100000-signatures-white-house-is-required-to-respond/>for them to issue a statement. It took 26 days to get the first 80,000 signatures and only 2 days to get the last 20,000 we needed. What a great couple days! Thanks to everyone who signed the petition and to those who pointed out that unlocking phones is indeed different than rooting phones. This is one step in the ongoing battle to maintain ownership over the devices we have in our loved ones pockets. Congrats Guardians and libtechers! Best, Mark --* @mbelinsky <https://twitter.com/mbelinsky> | markbelinsky.com<https://markbelinsky.com>| phone: +1-347-466-9327 | skype: markontheline * On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Seth David Schoen <sch...@eff.org> wrote: > hwamyeon writes: > > > While I agree that the anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA should > > be revoked, I don't think we should be tasking the Librarian of Congress > > to do this for us. The Librarian of Congress's power of exemption is > > supposed to be specifically in the interest of supporting the mission of > > the library. Fundamental changes to the DMCA is a political issue that > > we should be tasking Congress with. > > I agree that it would be preferable to have a comprehensive fix, like > repealing the entirety of §1201. > > The current law calls for the Librarian of Congress to decide "whether > persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be > in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition > under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under > this title of a particular class of copyrighted works". 17 USC > §1201(a)(1)(C). > So that determination isn't limited to "the interest of supporting the > mission of the library". > > -- > Seth Schoen <sch...@eff.org> > Senior Staff Technologist https://www.eff.org/ > Electronic Frontier Foundation https://www.eff.org/join > 454 Shotwell Street, San Francisco, CA 94110 +1 415 436 9333 x107 > -- > Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >
-- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech