[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Anti-DMCA clause (was Re: GPL v3 Draft

Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> "No program licensed under this License, which accesses a work, shall require 
> the authority of the copyright owner for that work, in order to gain access 
> to that work.

I'm not sure how a program _can_ require authority of a copyright
holder? Did you mean "The exercise of the rights granted under
this License shall not require the authority...?"

>  Accordingly, no program licensed under this License is a 
> technological measure which effectively controls access to any work."

That reads like a statement of fact, and you can debate whether it is
true in the general case. GPG is in fact an effective measure to
control access to any work. Lawyers usually say "is deemed to be", so
maybe you can write it as something like "The copyright holder
considers/deems no program licensed under this License to be..."

> We need to see the clauses from countries with similar DMCA-like laws to 
> successfully eviscerate them as well.

They all came from the WIPO Copyright Treaty of 1996, so the wording
will be largely the same everywhere. Here's the EU Copyright

   Linkname: European Union Final Directive on Copyright
        URL: http://cryptome.org/eu-copyright.htm

There they use "acts which are not authorised by the copyright


Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch & European patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/

Reply to: