Posted by mansfield.andrew on 02/22/07 03:11

On Feb 21, 2:25 pm, "Stuart Miller" <stuart_mil...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> <mansfield.and...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1171935208.043210.141040@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Feb 19, 5:20 pm, "Alpha" <n...@none.net> wrote:
> >> "Alpha" <n...@none.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:erd7ja$6te$1@zinnia.noc.ucla.edu...
>
> >> > <mansfield.and...@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.
>
> > Interesting, thanks for the heads up.
>
> > One of two suppliers is still selling this unit directly into the US
> > market new. It just seems absurd to me that ebay appears to be going
> > further than the DMCA requires. On further back-and-forth with them,
> > they basically admit they are not required by law to block the sale of
> > analog Macrovision removers, but their poilcy requires the take-down
> > of any ad / listing that "encourages" anyone to violate copyright, by
> > whatever means.
>
> > So . . . if I sell an old-school VCR and fill the ad / listing with
> > encouragement for folks to copy other VCR tapes, even non Macrovision,
> > I would be in violation of their terms of use. Or to keep up the with
> > the absurd analogies, I couldn't sell a book and fill the ad / listing
> > with advice to copy a chapter at Kinko's.
>
> > And in general, courts that extend anti-circumvention protection to
> > analog distortion should be tarred and feathered.
>
> > We will all soon be living in a world of micropayments to the patent
> > and copyright holders of the world. Welcome to hell.
>
> Many literary works require the expenditure of a great deal of time and
> effort, and often cash, to get the work created. It is totally fair that
> those who created the work be paid according to market forces for that work.
> When there is unregulated copying or such works, the owner of the work is
> denied payment, and the copier, who has invested nothing, stands to make the
> profit instead.
>
> If you want the content, for work or enjoyment, pay for it. If you want free
> entertainment, use your television.
>
> There is nothing evil about being a copyright or patent holder - that is
> what makes it worthwhile to take a risk on a project.
>
> I don't give away the rights to the products I have created - the rolayties
> give me the income so I can feed my family and create new products. If you
> judge that the copyright holder is rich enough already, then buy your
> entertainment from someone else. When people stop buying the products, the
> price will drop.
>
> If you want to live in a world of free products, then be prepared to work
> for the government, for free. This is the principle of communism - everybody
> shares, everybody works.
>
> Stuart

And what "market forces" are you talking about Stuart? Copyright and
patent are government grants that PREVENT market forces from
working.

A

[Back to original message]