Re: Avmap EKP-IV Linux Project!!!

Jim Pennino writes:
The mere act of breaking copy protection is a crime under DMCA

Not true. From
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00001204----000-.html>


TITLE 17 CHAPTER 12 § 1204 Criminal offenses and penalties

(a) In General.— Any person who violates section 1201 or 1202 willfully
and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain—

See the part about commercial advantage or financial gain? They must prove
that your violation was wilful and the you gained financially.

Just breaking copy protection, no matter what you do with the stuff
afterwards, is illegal.

Not true. From
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/usc_sec_17_00001204----000-.html>

(b) Limitation for Nonprofit Library, Archives, Educational Institution,
or Public Broadcasting Entity.— Subsection (a) shall not apply to a
nonprofit library, archives, educational institution, or public
broadcasting entity (as defined under section 118 (g).[1]


And

(d) Exemption for Nonprofit Libraries, Archives, and Educational
Institutions.—

(1) A nonprofit library, archives, or educational institution which gains
access to a commercially exploited copyrighted work solely in order to make
a good faith determination of whether to acquire a copy of that work for
the sole purpose of engaging in conduct permitted under this title shall
not be in violation of subsection (a)(1)(A). A copy of a work to which
access has been gained under this paragraph—

(A) may not be retained longer than necessary to make such good faith determination; and

(B) may not be used for any other purpose.

(2) The exemption made available under paragraph (1) shall only apply with
respect to a work when an identical copy of that work is not reasonably
available in another form.

(3) A nonprofit library, archives, or educational institution that
willfully for the purpose of commercial advantage or financial gain
violates paragraph (1)—

(A) shall, for the first offense, be subject to the civil remedies under section 1203; and

(B) shall, for repeated or subsequent offenses, in addition to the civil
remedies under section 1203, forfeit the exemption provided under
paragraph (1).

(4) This subsection may not be used as a defense to a claim under
subsection (a)(2) or (b), nor may this subsection permit a nonprofit
library, archives, or educational institution to manufacture, import, offer
to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product,
service, component, or part thereof, which circumvents a technological
measure.

(5) In order for a library or archives to qualify for the exemption under
this subsection, the collections of that library or archives shall be—

(A) open to the public; or

(B) available not only to researchers affiliated with the library or
archives or with the institution of which it is a part, but also to other
persons doing research in a specialized field.

(e) Law Enforcement, Intelligence, and Other Government Activities.— This
section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative,
protective, information security, or intelligence activity of an officer,
agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political
subdivision of a State, or a person acting pursuant to a contract with the
United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State. For purposes
of this subsection, the term “information security” means activities
carried out in order to identify and address the vulnerabilities of a
government computer, computer system, or computer network.

(f) Reverse Engineering.—

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who
has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program may
circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to
a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of
identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are
necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created
computer program with other programs, and that have not previously been
readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the
extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute
infringement under this title.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b), a person
may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a
technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a
technological measure, in order to enable the identification and
analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling
interoperability of an independently created computer program with
other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such
interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute
infringement under this title.

(3) The information acquired through the acts permitted under paragraph
(1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be made available
to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1) or (2), as the
case may be, provides such information or means solely for the purpose
of enabling interoperability of an independently created computer
program with other programs, and to the extent that doing so does not
constitute infringement under this title or violate applicable law
other than this section. (4) For purposes of this subsection, the term
“interoperability” means the ability of computer programs to exchange
information, and of such programs mutually to use the information which
has been exchanged.

(g) Encryption Research.—

(1) Definitions.— For purposes of this subsection—

(A) the term “encryption research” means activities necessary to identify
and analyze flaws and vulnerabilities of encryption technologies
applied to copyrighted works, if these activities are conducted to
advance the state of knowledge in the field of encryption technology or
to assist in the development of encryption products; and

(B) the term “encryption technology” means the scrambling and descrambling
of information using mathematical formulas or algorithms.

(2) Permissible acts of encryption research.— Notwithstanding the
provisions of subsection (a)(1)(A), it is not a violation of that
subsection for a person to circumvent a technological measure as
applied to a copy, phonorecord, performance, or display of a published
work in the course of an act of good faith encryption research if—

(A) the person lawfully obtained the encrypted copy, phonorecord,
performance, or display of the published work;

(B) such act is necessary to conduct such encryption research;

(C) the person made a good faith effort to obtain authorization before the circumvention; and

(D) such act does not constitute infringement under this title or a
violation of applicable law other than this section, including section 1030
of title 18 and those provisions of title 18 amended by the Computer Fraud
and Abuse Act of 1986.

(3) Factors in determining exemption.— In determining whether a person
qualifies for the exemption under paragraph (2), the factors to be
considered shall include—

(A) whether the information derived from the encryption research was
disseminated, and if so, whether it was disseminated in a manner
reasonably calculated to advance the state of knowledge or development
of encryption technology, versus whether it was disseminated in a
manner that facilitates infringement under this title or a violation of
applicable law other than this section, including a violation of
privacy or breach of security;

(B) whether the person is engaged in a legitimate course of study, is
employed, or is appropriately trained or experienced, in the field of
encryption technology; and

(C) whether the person provides the copyright owner of the work to which
the technological measure is applied with notice of the findings and
documentation of the research, and the time when such notice is
provided.

(4) Use of technological means for research activities.— Notwithstanding
the provisions of subsection (a)(2), it is not a violation of that
subsection for a person to—

(A) develop and employ technological means to circumvent a technological
measure for the sole purpose of that person performing the acts of good
faith encryption research described in paragraph (2); and

(B) provide the technological means to another person with whom he or she
is working collaboratively for the purpose of conducting the acts of
good faith encryption research described in paragraph (2) or for the
purpose of having that other person verify his or her acts of good
faith encryption research described in paragraph (2).

(5) Report to congress.— Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this chapter, the Register of Copyrights and the Assistant
Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of
Commerce shall jointly report to the Congress on the effect this
subsection has had on—

(A) encryption research and the development of encryption technology;

(B) the adequacy and effectiveness of technological measures designed to
protect copyrighted works; and

(C) protection of copyright owners against the unauthorized access to their
encrypted copyrighted works.

The report shall include legislative recommendations, if any.

(h) Exceptions Regarding Minors.— In applying subsection (a) to a component
or part, the court may consider the necessity for its intended and actual
incorporation in a technology, product, service, or device, which—

(1) does not itself violate the provisions of this title; and

(2) has the sole purpose to prevent the access of minors to material on the Internet.

(i) Protection of Personally Identifying Information.—

(1) Circumvention permitted.— Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection
(a)(1)(A), it is not a violation of that subsection for a person to
circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to
a work protected under this title, if—


(A) the technological measure, or the work it protects, contains the
capability of collecting or disseminating personally identifying
information reflecting the online activities of a natural person who
seeks to gain access to the work protected;

(B) in the normal course of its operation, the technological measure, or
the work it protects, collects or disseminates personally identifying
information about the person who seeks to gain access to the work
protected, without providing conspicuous notice of such collection or
dissemination to such person, and without providing such person with
the capability to prevent or restrict such collection or dissemination;

(C) the act of circumvention has the sole effect of identifying and
disabling the capability described in subparagraph (A), and has no
other effect on the ability of any person to gain access to any work;
and

(D) the act of circumvention is carried out solely for the purpose of
preventing the collection or dissemination of personally identifying
information about a natural person who seeks to gain access to the work
protected, and is not in violation of any other law.

(2) Inapplicability to certain technological measures.— This subsection
does not apply to a technological measure, or a work it protects, that
does not collect or disseminate personally identifying information and
that is disclosed to a user as not having or using such capability.

(j) Security Testing.—

(1) Definition.— For purposes of this subsection, the term “security
testing” means accessing a computer, computer system, or computer
network, solely for the purpose of good faith testing, investigating,
or correcting, a security flaw or vulnerability, with the authorization
of the owner or operator of such computer, computer system, or computer
network.

(2) Permissible acts of security testing.— Notwithstanding the provisions
of subsection (a)(1)(A), it is not a violation of that subsection for a
person to engage in an act of security testing, if such act does not
constitute infringement under this title or a violation of applicable
law other than this section, including section 1030 of title 18 and
those provisions of title 18 amended by the Computer Fraud and Abuse
Act of 1986.

(3) Factors in determining exemption.— In determining whether a person
qualifies for the exemption under paragraph (2), the factors to be
considered shall include—

(A) whether the information derived from the security testing was used
solely to promote the security of the owner or operator of such
computer, computer system or computer network, or shared directly with
the developer of such computer, computer system, or computer network;
and

(B) whether the information derived from the security testing was used or
maintained in a manner that does not facilitate infringement under this
title or a violation of applicable law other than this section,
including a violation of privacy or breach of security.

(4) Use of technological means for security testing.— Notwithstanding the
provisions of subsection (a)(2), it is not a violation of that
subsection for a person to develop, produce, distribute or employ
technological means for the sole purpose of performing the acts of
security testing described in subsection (2),[1] provided such
technological means does not otherwise violate section [2] (a)(2).



Providing tools or instructions on how to break copy protection is
illegal.

See above.

Just about anyone can initiate an indictment against you for violating
DMCA;

Only a prosecutor can initiate an indictment. And only a person owning
copyright-protected work protected by the "technological means" that
you circumvented and injured by your actions can file a complaint or a
lawsuit. No one else has standing.


--
John Hasler
john@xxxxxxxxxx
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
.