Toward a More Balanced Model: Revision of Anti-circumvention Rules

  • Jerry Jie Hua
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter will analyze the protection of digital rights management (DRM) information and the anti-circumvention rules which prohibit unauthorized circumvention of technological measures. This chapter will first provide a basic understanding on the protection of DRM and technological measures by explaining the key terms that have been incorporated into the anti-circumvention provisions. This chapter will then examine the balanced and unbalanced aspects under the anti-circumvention rules provided by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of the United States. The balanced aspect is supported by general and specific exceptions as well as an ongoing administrative rule-making proceeding with regard to the immunization of liability from circumvention acts. However, the problem of imbalance still exists, mainly due to prohibition against the circumvention of access-control measures and trafficking of circumvention-facilitated devices, which outweighs the balanced aspects. The chapter will finally recommend a more balanced model for anti-circumvention rules by including a technological component for minimalist use, a legislative component for general exceptions, a judicial component for case decisions, and an alternative scheme design for protecting technological measures under competition law.

Keywords

Expense Defend Oman Monopoly 

References

  1. 1.
    Lichtman, D. G. (2006). Defusing DRM (John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper No. 282 (2nd Series)). Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=883676. Visited 2 Oct 2011.
  2. 2.
    Yu, P. K. (2006–2007). Anticircumvention and anti-anticircumvention. Denver University Law Review, 84, 13–77.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Samuelson, P. (1996). Towards more sensible anti-circumvention regulations. Available at http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~pam/papers/fincrypt2.pdf. Visited 2 Oct 2011.
  4. 4.
    Efroni, Z. (2011). Anticircumvention laws. In Efroni, Z. (Ed.) Access-right: The future of digital copyright law. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Borland, J. Student faces suits over key to CD locks. CNET News (9 October 2003). Available at http://news.cnet.com/2100-1025-5089168.html. Visited 2 Oct 2011.
  6. 6.
    US Copyright Office. (1998). The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998: US Copyright Office Summary. Available at http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf. Visited 1 July 2011.
  7. 7.
    Tian, Y. (2009). Rethinking intellectual property: The political economy of copyright protection in the digital era. London: Routledge-Cavendish.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reichman, J. H., Dinwoodie, G. B., & Samuelson, P. (2007). A reverse notice and takedown regime to enable public interest uses of technically protected copyrighted works. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 22, 981–1006.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Besek, J. M. (2004). Anti-circumvention laws and copyright: A report from the Kernochan Center for Law, Media and Arts. Columbia Journal of Law & Arts, 27, 385–519.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khanna, D. S. (2013). Phone unlocking made legal. Available at http://www.nationalreview.com/article/349379/phone-unlocking-made-legal. Visited 25 June 2013.
  11. 11.
    Band, J. (2013). Cell phone unlocking: A legal primer. Available at http://www.districtdispatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/band-cell-phone-unlocking-08mar13.pdf. Visited 4 Nov 2013.
  12. 12.
    Samuelson, P. (2003, April). DRM {and, or, vs.} the Law. Communications of the ACM, 46(4), 41–45.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Samuelson, P., & Schultz, J. (2007). Should copyright owners have to give notice of their use of technical protection measures? Journal on Telecommunications and High Technology Law, 6, 41–76.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Burk, D. L. (2003). Anticircumvention misuse. UCLA Law Review, 50, 1095–1140.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang, Q. (2011). The justification of protection on technological measures in the copyright law. Chinese Journal of Law, 4, 86–103 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. (1999). Advisory report on Copyright Amendment (Digital Agenda) Bill 1999 (Para 4.13, p. 60). Available at http://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/house_of_representatives_committees?url=/laca/digitalagenda/contents.htm. Visited 10 Oct 2011.
  17. 17.
    Hoffer, A. (2011, Summer). A matter of access: How bypassing DRM does not always violate the DMCA. Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, 7(1), 13–25. Available at http://digital.law.washington.edu/dspace-law/bitstream/handle/1773.1/1049/7WJLTA013.pdf?sequence=5. Visited 10 Oct 2011.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jerry Jie Hua
    • 1
  1. 1.Deacons (Hong Kong)Hong KongChina

Personalised recommendations