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.

[Back to original message]