|  | Posted by Alpha on 02/19/07 22:20 
"Alpha" <none@none.net> wrote in message news:erd7ja$6te$1@zinnia.noc.ucla.edu...
 >
 > <mansfield.andrew@gmail.com> wrote in message
 > news:1171908148.631190.276770@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
 >> On Feb 19, 11:33 am, Don Del Grande <del_grande_n...@earthlink.net>
 >> wrote:
 >>> Andrew Mansfield wrote:
 >>> >> Macrovision Buster for Sale on Ebay: Tonight Only.  DVD-DX11.
 >>>
 >>> >> Please see my Ebay listing at the following link if you are
 >>> >> interested:
 >>>
 >>> >Hi guys:
 >>>
 >>> >I am really sorry you thought my posting was spam.  It is very
 >>> >difficult to get word out about these devices: everything I read
 >>> >indicates they are legal.  They are not regulated under the DMCA
 >>> >because they are analog signal cleaners.  Yet last night Ebay took
 >>> >down my auction for copyright infringement.
 >>>
 >>> Your problem might be that eBay could be trying to prevent the sale of
 >>> something whose use is illegal.  (17 USC 1201(a)(1)(A): "No person
 >>> shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls
 >>> access to a work protected under this title."  Using your "signal
 >>> cleaner" does just that.)
 >>>
 >>> Besides, if you want a strict interpretation of DMCA, selling your
 >>> device sounds like it is illegal (17 USC 1201(a)(2)(A): "No person
 >>> shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise
 >>> traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or
 >>> part thereof, that 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"; your eBay auction page admits that your
 >>> Macrovision Buster removes Macrovision - true, it's to "remove color
 >>> and analog noise caused by Macrovision," but nevertheless it removes
 >>> Macrovision).
 >>>
 >>> -- Don
 >>
 >> Sorry Don:
 >>
 >> Not true.  The terms of the DMCA apply *only* to digital technologies,
 >> i.e., encryption.  No analog protection scheme, however implemented,
 >> qualifies under the "title" of the DMCA.  Look at the definitions at
 >> the top of the title.
 >>
 >> Thanks to the dozens of people who have emailed in support of this
 >> device and with advice on selling it (and the many places that do).
 >> It is heartening to see so many good people opposed to the DMCA and
 >> copyright fascism.
 >>
 >> Andrew
 >>
 >
 > This is a grey area.  A number of rulings have required Macrovision
 > removal in DVD recorders imported from China to be disabled...etc etc.
 > The courts in California disagree with your interpretation.
 >
 > There are several important modifications made to the DMCA in December by
 > the Library of Congress, but they do not hold here.
 >
 > I believe the Sima CT-2 clarifier had to be pulled from the market by
 > Sima...and that is what your device does.
 >
 >
 >
 
 PS
 
 I am absolutely against the absurdly written DMCA, and a member of the EFF,
 but that does not change reality.
  Navigation: [Reply to this message] |