And another Ubuntu convert!

[Derek Broughton]

Mario Vukelic wrote:

> On Sun, 2009-01-25 at 22:53 -0400, Derek Broughton wrote:
>> Yes, but as Gilles says, that isn't law,
> 
>> and in any case it doesn't make the
>> same restrictions as DMCA.
> 
> As far as deCSS goes it does, if I am not stupid (though IANAL). Chapter
> III, Article 6:

IANALeither, but

> 1. Member States shall provide adequate legal protection against the
> circumvention of any effective technological measures, which the person
> concerned carries out in the knowledge, or with reasonable grounds to
> know, that he or she is pursuing that objective.

Who can argue with that?  (OK, any lawyer, could, but I _think_ it says 
there should be laws to prevent me stealing somebody else's property).  I 
don't think it says I should only be able to play a DVD on a specifically 
authorized device - which the DMCA does.

> 2. Member States shall provide adequate legal protection against the
> manufacture, import, distribution, sale, rental, advertisement for sale
> or rental, or possession for commercial purposes of devices, products or
> components or the provision of services which:
> 
> (a) are promoted, advertised or marketed for the purpose of
> circumvention of, or
> 
> (b) have only a limited commercially significant purpose or use other
> than to circumvent, or

And putting deCSS into my movie player so that I can play a DRM'd DVD that I 
own, doesn't seem contrary to that either.  I particularly like the " 
limited commercially significant purpose or use" - a lawyer would make 
mincemeat of that.  Is it "commercial (purpose or use)" or (commercial 
purpose) or use"?  If the former, then it tends to delegitimize any non-
commercial software, whatever its purpose, and if the latter it tends to 
decriminalize deCSS provided you don't actually copy anything.