[Coco] Re: [Color Computer] History Bytes

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

At 06:28 PM 1/10/05 -0500, jdaggett at gate.net wrote:
>It is my understanding that Section 1201 deals with circumvention 
>of copyright protection systems. 
>That should mean that if I copy protect a media in such a manner to 
>restrict only the lincensee usage of the copyrighted material, then 
>no one is allowed to circumvent the copy protection. No one is 
>allowed to "reverse" engineer the copy protection system to gain 
>unauthorized usage or prevent authorized users access to 
>copyrighted material. 

What it does not define is what constitutes protection, and that's the
gaping maw that can swallow anybody who crosses a company with a mean
streak. That little seal over the screw on the bottom of the computer. Did
you remove it? Does that constitute unauthorized access? Does the statement
"no user serviceable parts" mean that? How about the fact that the item is
in a ROM which was intended to be read only by the machine (viz. the CONTU
report from way back in 1978)? And how much of the integrated circuit mask
comes into play there (a separate provision of the law not intended for
this reason, but throwable-in by lawyers).

In other words, I subscribe to the sleeping-dog approach, because otherwise
you'll get tangled in this web. That is: do it, and if your doing adds
value, everyone will quietly accept the eventual cash. Who's to say how
valuable classic code will become?

In parallel rights issues, just read the first 2 pages of chapter 1 of
Lawrence Lessig's "The Future of Ideas". That clarifies how one's thinking
is completely transformed by the intellectual property shenanigans going on
right now.

And I say all this as a member of ASCAP who depends on rights & royalties
for income!

Dennis