[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
- To: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
- From: Dan Steinberg <synthesis(at)videotron.ca>
- Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 19:44:09 -0400
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
I believe they were trying to claim the encryption in the garage door
opener codes (the stuff they use to prevent unauthorized access to your
garage by some one with a programmable remote) was a TPM...and the
mechanism to 'copy' one code to another device...was circumvention....
I have to admit I read it very quickly....
Richard Hartman wrote:
>btw: to qualify for DMCA the TPM must be protecting some copyrightable content. AFAICT the garage doors were protecting cars, not content. Why wasn't the claim dismissed as inapplicable?
>
>
>
>
--
Dan Steinberg
SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec fax: (819) 827-4398
J9B 1N1 e-mail:[email protected]