• Lka1988
    link
    fedilink
    English
    133
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Removing DRM has always been “illegal”.

    However: German concentration camps were legal, while families protecting Jewish citizens from being taken to said concentration camps was strictly illegal.

    What’s legal is not always right (ethically and morally), and what’s right is not always legal. Remember that.

    • @Yingwu@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      I’d like to clarify that removing DRM does lie in a grey zone in many countries, including in the US due to some court rulings. In some countries the right to make a backup of your e-book might have priority over copyright law for example.

      • Lka1988
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2610 days ago

        Sure, but companies who employ DRM have argued against that grey area since DRM was a thing. Something something IP/copyright/licensing/whatever bullshit… IMO: fuck you, I bought it, I own it, eat shit.

        • sunzu2
          link
          fedilink
          1010 days ago

          Correct… How are they going to enforce their “property” rights when I do it at home?

          These corpo parasites are delulu hence why I stopped spending money on media.

          Get fucked.

      • Ulrich
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -610 days ago

        The DMCA makes it pretty clear that “Circumvention of Technological Protection Measures” is illegal. There are no exceptions for whether you own or redistribute the content in question.

        • @Delzur@vegantheoryclub.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1010 days ago

          It’s not needed.

          If another law says you have a right to create backups of digital content you own, then two laws are in conflict. Why would dcma have precedence?

          No idea about US, but in some countries it would be up to judges, and with enough rulings it would be settled one way or another.

          • Neshura
            link
            fedilink
            English
            710 days ago

            At least here in Germany the bypassing of DRM is so legal they don’t even try to get you for it. The only thing they ever go after nowadays is distributing and consuming that cracked content (get logless VPN and that problem solves itself). But if you go and rip Netflix movies for your own enjoyment they have no leg to stand on in court unless you distribute it.

          • @psud@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            610 days ago

            Aussie copyright law gives us the right to circumvent protections in order to make copies to watch on a device the original can’t be played on.

            Linux out of the box is remarkably incompatible with DRM protected content and so makes an excellent thing on which one might want to watch, listen to, or read a thing

          • Ulrich
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -510 days ago

            If another law says you have a right to create

            That law doesn’t exist and that’s not how law works. Law does not specify what is allowed, only what isn’t. Breaking encryption isn’t.

            • @DaTingGoBrrr@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              710 days ago

              It exists in Sweden. We are allowed to make private copies of movies, music and whatever. If I want to rip a CD and give it to my family and friends that is 100% legal. But it’s not legal to sell the copies.

              • Ulrich
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -610 days ago

                Didn’t realize the DMCA applied in Sweden.

                • @DaTingGoBrrr@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  29 days ago

                  Many European countries (and companies there in) listen to and respect DMCA takedown requests and my point is that it does not apply to individuals. So yes, it applies in Sweden too. Maybe after Trump is done destroying the diplomatic relationships with Europe we can finally start not giving a shit about DMCA.

            • Laurel Raven
              link
              fedilink
              English
              410 days ago

              What are you talking about? Law absolutely can specify that something is allowed.

            • @shinxir@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              310 days ago

              The right for a private good exists. In the same way different countries exist, different views in copyright and the right to backup exists.

              • Ulrich
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -4
                edit-2
                10 days ago

                We were talking about laws, not rights or views.

          • Ulrich
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -99 days ago

            That’s great. This conversation was about the US.

            • @Pirata@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              6
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              It really wasn’t.

              You tried to make it about the US when the topic is about a company that operates internationally, that’s what.

              Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised is breaking national law in many countries with their one-size-fits-all approach.

              But I’d rather just not give a crap about that and just keep pirating my books.

              • Ulrich
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -4
                edit-2
                9 days ago

                It really was. Do you not know what the DMCA is? It’s US law.

    • @cecilkorik@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1810 days ago

      Sometimes doing something illegal is anti-social behavior. Sometimes it’s anti-authoritarian behavior. These are not the same thing.

  • @Railcar8095@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4410 days ago

    From a legal standpoint, is it more illegal to remove DRM or to just download DRM-freed content?

    Meta lawyers think the second is fine, BTW.

    • @realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      710 days ago

      I’ve never heard of anyone getting arrested for removing DRM. DRM removal tools are actively sold online with no crackdown. However people keep getting busted here and there for piracy, and piracy sites keep getting shut down.

      I think at the end of the day if the copyright holders are getting paid they don’t really care, and the police cares about piracy way less than they do.

      • Christian
        link
        fedilink
        English
        710 days ago

        I remember reading that the most significant impact DRM has is on security research. Individuals don’t care about bypassing DRM, but an organization is not going to fund anything involving it because of the legal concern. So if a researcher wants to look into a file format behind DRM, or the DRM mechanism itself, being used as an attack vector, that’s not going to get funding.

        The defense that companies will make is that they’re happy to grant exceptions in these cases, but in practice the company will make the exceptions as narrow as possible to err on the side of maintaining as much control as possible, while a research organization will want to err on the side of avoiding potential grey areas, meaning the exceptions are inevitability too restrictive to allow much of anything to come of them.

    • @Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -110 days ago

      It’s more legal to share military secrets with journalists. Don’t believe me? Wait and see how long that guy ends up spending in jail.

    • Ulrich
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -610 days ago

      There is no “more illegal”. One is illegal, the other is not.

      • Neshura
        link
        fedilink
        English
        710 days ago

        Robbing a store is illegal. Murdering someone is also illegal, however one of the two is for good reasons punished much more harshly.

        • Ulrich
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -3
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          It’s not a “take”, it is a fact.

          Stop commenting unless you have evidence to the contrary.

  • M. Orange
    link
    fedilink
    English
    28
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Just in case anyone didn’t feel like reading the article, here’s the last (and imo most important) paragraph:

    However, without changing the DMCA, we can’t expect to see real, lasting change in this space. Doctorow said as much to me: “What we really need to do is get rid of DMCA 1201, that law that makes it a crime to format shift your media…it’s the same law that stops farmers from fixing their tractors, blocks independent mechanics from fixing your car, stops rivals from setting up alternative app stores for phones and games consoles…this law is a menace!”

    • Chahk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1210 days ago

      Good guy Meta. Fighting for us little guys, downloading terabytes of books, defending against lawsuits. Maybe they’ll overturn DMCA?

      /s

      • @psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1010 days ago

        I luckily live in a country where I may break copy protection if it is to move the content into a format where I can use it as I prefer

        Eg I could (and did) legally break copy protection on DVDs to allow me to watch them on my Linux computer

        • Neshura
          link
          fedilink
          English
          610 days ago

          Over here you can even make copies for personal use or sharing with a close group of friends.

          I love the unintended consequences of declaring that the internet is to be treated under the same laws as radio broadcasts. Suddenly being allowed to make a recorded copy of anything as long as you yourself create the copy becomes significantly more important.

  • Timmy Mac
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2510 days ago

    If that’s true, I’m pretty much Al Capone at this point.

  • southsamurai
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2310 days ago

    Fwiw, I’ve never put drm on anything I’ve published digitally, and never will.

    Not that it matters, nobody buys my shit in the first place lol. But, as a matter of principle, even my crappy stories as a form of culture aren’t only for the people with money.

    Mind you, that do? I have no beef with. You make your own choices, and I ain’t mad about it. But it just isn’t something I can do.

    • Neshura
      link
      fedilink
      English
      410 days ago

      I go out of my way to exclusively spend money with the one publisher I’ve found who does not put DRM in their ebooks. I spend lavishly with them because good practices need to be rewarded monetarily in capitalism or they die out.

      The rest I pirate.

    • Draconic NEO
      link
      fedilink
      English
      610 days ago

      And the name is derived from an awful slur too. The history of that is really messed up.

      • katy ✨
        link
        fedilink
        English
        210 days ago

        wait really? i didn’t know of any of its history.

        off to the wikipedia rabbit hole i go

    • Neshura
      link
      fedilink
      English
      510 days ago

      I will never stop being confused by this law. Just crossing the street cannot possibly be illegal anywhere. I’m fully convinced the entire thing is an elaborate joke by the americans.

      • @baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        710 days ago

        Like everything else here in the US, it’s borne out of racism. In the Jim Crow era, most black people couldn’t afford a car. White people driving around didn’t like those pesky walking people getting in their way, so they made it difficult to cross the street. It then gave cops a way to threaten/arrest/persecute them.

  • @orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1310 days ago

    It’s interesting when people are put to the choice. On the one hand they could purchase a book with DRM that they don’t actually own. On the other hand, they could look for alternative means by which to obtain the book. And the more the publishers f*** with you, the more you might be inclined to never give them a penny.

  • Draconic NEO
    link
    fedilink
    English
    810 days ago

    So do it anyway, not like they could ever know. It’s not a very enforceable thing is it.

    • @orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      410 days ago

      How can they catch people who have produced unlocked epubs? There are plenty of ways if they have your device at some future date.

      I suppose the easiest predictable thing other than having your device seized when you’re entering the country for example or when you get arrested for example is that back doors could be installed on Android or iPhone that look for unapproved media.

      The technology is already good enough for that. It’s only a question of implementation.

      • @Taleya@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 days ago

        I’m too fucken old to read a book on a goddamn phone screen and my eco reader is too old to enshittify. Mwahahahahha i am untouchable

  • @StarlightDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    510 days ago

    Sadly its not doable with Kindle and Linux anymore. I buy my ebooks since I only read indie but I will only do it from Itch or other DRM free sites.