g.

Addendum: Below is some language from the DMCA suggesting that the mere ACT of circumvention—not just supplying the tools or information–is illegal. Even this isn’t a definitive answer since I’m not quoting from the entire DMCA. But if nothing else, the act makes things rather problematic. My advice would be to play it safe and NOT circumvent unless the copyright office specifically says you can. Do you know of a specific format-conversion exemption? I’m on your side. In fact, I see all these ifs as one more reason for abolishing the nastier provisions of the DMCA. – David

‘‘CHAPTER 12—COPYRIGHT PROTECTION AND
MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
‘‘Sec.
‘‘1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems.
‘‘1202. Integrity of copyright management information.
‘‘1203. Civil remedies.
‘‘1204. Criminal offenses and penalties.
‘‘1205. Savings clause.
‘‘§ 1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems
‘‘(a) VIOLATIONS REGARDING CIRCUMVENTION OF TECHNOLOGICAL
MEASURES.—(1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological
measure that effectively controls access to a work protected
under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence
shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the
date of the enactment of this chapter.
‘‘(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).
‘‘(C) During the 2-year period described in subparagraph (A),
and during each succeeding 3-year period, the Librarian of Congress,
upon the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, who
shall consult with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and
Information of the Department of Commerce and report and comment
on his or her views in making such recommendation, shall
make the determination in a rulemaking proceeding on the record
for purposes of subparagraph (B) of whether persons who are users
of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-
year period, adversely affected by the prohibition under subparagraph
(A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under this title
of a particular class of copyrighted works. In conducting such rulemaking,
the Librarian shall examine—

So, in the States it MIGHT be legal to break the DRM on a purchased e-book for the purpose of reading the e-book on a device that does not support the copy-protected version. This has never been tested in court, and probably never will be. Note that if this is illegal, then so is converting between two unencrypted e-book formats (without permission of the copyright holder) for the same purpose. Most people would do this without a 2nd thought.

I have a laptop that doesn’t have a built-in optical drive, and many of the games I want to play on it — that I went out and paid $50-$60 for — won’t play without the CD in the drive. Thanks to nonsense like that, I know far more than I ever wanted to at this stage in my life about nocd cracks and the various methods such DRM uses.

Same thing with DVDs. Personally, I’d like that DVD of Monsters, Inc. that I bought for my kids to last more than a few months, but it won’t with my kids. So I made a backup copy. Oops…federal felon right there.

And, of course, we’ve gotten to the absurdity with intellectual property that it is almost impossible not to commit an IP crime. Prince is upset because someone posts a short video of their toddler zooming around to “Lets Go Crazy.” Well, crap, I have all sorts of pictures and videos of my kids online that all contain potentially copyright infringing and legally actionable materials.

Nothing has served the “information wants to be free” folks better than the IP industry’s “every last bit of information needs to be locked up” approach.