View Single Post
Old July 20th, 2007   #6 (permalink)
admindv
Site Owner
 
admindv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,720
Thanks: 84
Thanked 1,570 Times in 481 Posts
Rep Power: 10 admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute admindv has a reputation beyond repute
well i'm not going to tell you this is Bull ****. But this is total bull****. this is the same type of thing they tried to do with the VCR when it was made. The part of the DMCA that they site is this

Quote:
(b) Additional violations.
(1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product,
service, device, component, or part thereof, that--
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion
thereof; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof.
The tv stations did this same thing to the VCR where they said the only thing that the VCR was built for was to promote the illegal recording of copyrighted works on TV. The court said that was BS then because the VCR has tons of other commercially prevalent uses such as taping non copyrighted material, copying or archiving other VHS tapes, etc.

I think this is largely a tactic to freak out the online community that utilize FTA equipment. By mentioning the people by name and by mentioning specific websites the lawyers are attempting to scare people. i can't see any of this going anywhere. Next week when i am done with the project i am working on, i will draft a memo about this which shows the relevant portions of the law that they are citing to and how they cannot reasonably believe that this will get any real consideration

Arbor, i appreciate you bringing the news about this because it is of note in the industry, but please be careful because your posts are sort of alarming to many people who may not understand the whole thing
__________________
Bush Says Drill, Drill, Drill — and Oil Drops $9...

Fta-Blog.com -- We need writers and contributors

----If you are having payment and access problems click here

----BEFORE you ask about your access... have you checked the status of your paypal payment?
admindv is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to admindv For This Useful Post:
arboristman (July 20th, 2007), blakber (September 5th, 2008), Dennisboy39 (February 23rd, 2008), jocosatt (January 17th, 2008), littlesmallbubb (January 30th, 2008), logielogie (January 17th, 2008), lorenzana (January 24th, 2008), Phoxx (July 20th, 2007)