New WIPO treaty = death of CloneCD?

Well, the governments(s) and RIAA/MPAA who pay them off have done it to us again. WIPO (unelected and unaccountable) have ratified a treaty dealing with copyrights, which will be enforcable worldwide (see article on Slashdot). Supposedly the treaty will have anti-circumvention provisions just like the DMCA in the USA. This treaty may spell the end of proggies like CloneCD, Blindwrite, EAC, Feurio, etc...

In the USA we've seen the entertainment and software industries use the DMCA as a sledgehammer to shut down web sites, sue people out of busines, have people arrested, prohibit importation of certain electronic devices, declare certain pieces of software to be illegal, silence academic research and eliminate free speech.

Bottom line seems to be download the latest versions of your favorite program now, while you still can.

It's 100% legal to make a backup of your original software, audio material and so on. So what's the message here?

For a legal story, you read this article:
http://maximumpc.com/reprints/reprint_2002-01-08.html

I can give you plenty of legal links on this, but to a non-legal it is hard to read (even I have difficulty reading that stuff).

But it is not 100% legal to make a backup copy, not even for personal use.

Wrong. It *used* to be legal to make a personal backup copy of something that you legally own. No longer. Hollywood (MPAA and RIAA) have seen to that. All they have to do is put some weak-assed encryption or some copy control techniques on the disk, and the new laws make it a felony to attempt to circumvent the copy protection. This is what I'm talking about. The USA has the DMCA, and now the world has the new WIPO treaty. They make *any* circumvention of copy protection illegal for *any* reason. They make "trafficing" in circumvention software (like CloneCD) illegal. They make writing such software illegal. The new laws make providing information on how to circumvent copy protection illegal. Even linking to other sites with the information has been declared illegal. The politicians have been paid-off to enact these laws. We're screwed.

No, according to the legal definition, in the USA, anyway, circumvention means things which actually modify the data. The free use clause is relatively liberal, believe it or not. The real danger of a lawsuit from the RIAA is not that they will win, but they will make it so expensive for the defendant that he will have to give up and submit, even though he has done nothing wrong.

I dunno Dave, check out the following link explaining the DMCA's anti circumvention provisions.

http://www.chillingeffects.org/anticircumvention/

The DMCA is bad, but now Hollywood is paying congress to enact something far worse, called the SSSCA. It would mandate hardware copy control protection be built-into all computers, operating systems and applications. I also heard it would make it illegal to hook a computer not so controlled to the internet. Jeez...

@ Tremo:

As long as you own a liscense to the original, it is legal.

According to the DMCA, Sec. 1201, A. 1 (b),

"(B) The prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to persons who are users of a copyrighted work which is in a particular class of works, if such persons are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make noninfringing uses of that particular class of works under this title, as determined under subparagraph (C)."

and Sec. 1201, A. 3,
"(3) As used in this subsection -
(A) to ''circumvent a technological measure'' means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
(B) a technological measure ''effectively controls access to a work'' if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work. "

and Sec. 1201, C, 1&3

(1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title

(3) Nothing in this section shall require that the design of, or design and selection of parts and components for, a consumer electronics, telecommunications, or computing product provide for a response to any particular technological measure, so long as such part or component, or the product in which such part or component is integrated, does not otherwise fall within the prohibitions of subsection (a)(2) or (b)(1).


As long as you own a liscense to use the software (which you do by going to BestBuy, Fry's, etc.) it is perfectly legal.

don't worry guys..(and girl's)... there will always be someone, fighting the law..fighting for our right's...
and if someone busts the makers of CCD, BlindWrite etc. , there will always be someone there to take his place...

we, are always one step ahead...

/phuno

Jihaw to that. Sig-stealer...

As long as you own a liscense to the original, it is legal.

Amen...

My 2 cents.

Just recently I had a bet with a chap of mine about Microsloft's policy concerning this very thing. As a MCP I have to know something about licensing and had a discussion with a rep/sales person from MS>


You can use a burnt(oops I meant a backedup copy)of there operating system as long as you purchase a license. If you sell the pc with a os on it, it has to have a license on it and you can give the person you sold the box the burnt cd you made. You do not need the ORIGINAL cd if you have purchased a license!!
Huh is eactly ehat I said too...


The DMCA is a scary thing and can be used to really mess a persons day up. There are priacy busts all over the place.