• Lka1988@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Removing DRM has always been “illegal”.

    However: German concentration camps were legal, while families protecting Jewish citizens from being taken to said concentration camps was strictly illegal.

    What’s legal is not always right (ethically and morally), and what’s right is not always legal. Remember that.

    • Yingwu@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      I’d like to clarify that removing DRM does lie in a grey zone in many countries, including in the US due to some court rulings. In some countries the right to make a backup of your e-book might have priority over copyright law for example.

      • Lka1988@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        Sure, but companies who employ DRM have argued against that grey area since DRM was a thing. Something something IP/copyright/licensing/whatever bullshit… IMO: fuck you, I bought it, I own it, eat shit.

  • M. Orange@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    15 days ago

    Just in case anyone didn’t feel like reading the article, here’s the last (and imo most important) paragraph:

    However, without changing the DMCA, we can’t expect to see real, lasting change in this space. Doctorow said as much to me: “What we really need to do is get rid of DMCA 1201, that law that makes it a crime to format shift your media…it’s the same law that stops farmers from fixing their tractors, blocks independent mechanics from fixing your car, stops rivals from setting up alternative app stores for phones and games consoles…this law is a menace!”

    • Chahk@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 days ago

      Good guy Meta. Fighting for us little guys, downloading terabytes of books, defending against lawsuits. Maybe they’ll overturn DMCA?

      /s

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    It’s interesting when people are put to the choice. On the one hand they could purchase a book with DRM that they don’t actually own. On the other hand, they could look for alternative means by which to obtain the book. And the more the publishers f*** with you, the more you might be inclined to never give them a penny.

  • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    From a legal standpoint, is it more illegal to remove DRM or to just download DRM-freed content?

    Meta lawyers think the second is fine, BTW.

    • Neshura@bookwormstory.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      15 days ago

      I will never stop being confused by this law. Just crossing the street cannot possibly be illegal anywhere. I’m fully convinced the entire thing is an elaborate joke by the americans.

      • baggachipz@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        Like everything else here in the US, it’s borne out of racism. In the Jim Crow era, most black people couldn’t afford a car. White people driving around didn’t like those pesky walking people getting in their way, so they made it difficult to cross the street. It then gave cops a way to threaten/arrest/persecute them.