NewsFlash: RIAA Opposes FAIR USE Bill
By Craig Childs
The alterations to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act [DMCA] have come under scrutiny from the RIAA, who claim that the changes put content providers at risk again by advocating piracy. But we already knew they were going to say that.
Representatives Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat, and John Doolittle, a California Republican, introduced the FAIR USE [Freedom and Innovation Revitalizing US Entrepreneurship] bill on Tuesday that allows teachers, from grade school and up, to circumvent DRM restrictions for classroom use.
Also included in the ‘green zone’ are librarians archiving content and news reporters. They are now allowed to:
1. Make “a compilation of audiovisual works” for classroom use,
2. Skip commercials and “objectionable content,”
3. Transmit files over a home network,
4. Access works in the public domain, and
5. Access works “of substantial public interest solely for purposes of criticism, comment, news, reporting, scholarship, or research.”
“The Digital Millennium Copyright Act dramatically tilted the copyright balance toward complete copyright protection at the expense of the public’s right to fair use,” Boucher said in a statement. “Without a change in the law, individuals will be less willing to purchase digital media if their use of the media within the home is severely circumscribed and the manufacturers of equipment and software that enables circumvention for legitimate purposes will be reluctant to introduce the products into the market.”
Boucher is completely on point here. Take away a consumer’s freedom and they will take away their business. But the RIAA still don’t see eye to eye with the DMCA changes. They feel that allowing one group of people to bypass, or hack, DRM protection and restrict the rest is hypocritical of the Act’s origin.
“The difference between hacking done for non-infringing purposes and hacking done to steal is impossible to determine and enforce,” the RIAA said in its statement.
So why did they try in the first place?
The DMCA laws failed to clearly define legal and illegal digital behavior when it became apparent in 1999 that it was pretty easy to copy digital content.
What content providers forgot was that although it was easier to copy things like DVDs and MP3 files, there was the trade off of having their content so easily available for purchase and review. But that’s another story.
The interesting part of the FAIR USE changes is the RIAA feel that now DRM hacking is, at least, semi-legal, software makers will jump at the chance to provide ‘piracy’ software to battle their competitors. For example, an iTunes Store MP3 decoder made by Microsoft.
The RIAA does make a point. While the changes are definitely a step in the right direction for consumers [and I mean consumers] and their rights as legal owners of products, there still is a very vague line between what the DMCA is protecting and what they’re protecting against.
There is no doubt that content providers need intellectual property to be protected, but not at the, almost demeaning, expense of the consumer. DRM is intrusive and unnecessarily restrictive. However, there have been very good laws and practices in place already, for many years, that protect intellectual property owners. It’s called copyright. But that’s another story.
Related:
Entry was posted
on Wednesday, February 28th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
under 
Print This Post
Read more entries by Craig Childs.
Stumble It!
March 1st, 2007
I have sent a message to my Senators and Congressman asking them to support this bill, and any other FAIR USE supporting bills, everyone that reads this should do the same.