On October 28, the U.S. Copyright Office approved four narrow exemptions to the DMCA anti-circumvention clause and denied dozens of others that would have restored substantial fair-use rights now overridden by DRM with the legal blessing of the DMCA. Public interest advocates (e.g. here and here) have criticized the narrowness of the ruling, and some affected groups are planning an appeal to federal court. More news coverage.
My own proposal was among those denied. It would have permitted circumvention to gain access to works for which the copyright holder has consented to provide open access. Excerpt from the proposal: "For this class of works, an exceptionless anti-circumvention clause threatens readers with criminal penalties for gaining the kind of access that the copyright holder desires to make available. When authors consent to open access, then all use is non-infringing use. Preventing readers from taking advantage of this gift from authors not only frustrates copyright holders who wish to make this gift, but negates their sacrifice in relinquishing revenue, obstructs the free exchange of scientific ideas, and impedes research. For these reasons, most works in this class will be published in open-access archives or open-access journals, without DRM, and consequently circumvention will never be an issue. But the exemption is needed for the occasional works of this class for which user access is hindered by DRM barriers."
Posted by
Peter Suber at 11/02/2003 08:59:00 AM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
