Re: 17 USC 1201 (circumvention) cases?

On Wed, Jan 19, 2000, George L. Abbott <glabbott[_at_]library.syr.edu> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Karsten M. Self <kmself[_at_]ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know of cases or appeals involving violations of 17 USC
> > 1201 copy protection circumvention. The law is relatively new, and
> > the grace period for circumvention actions has only recently expired.
> >
> > My current interest are the MPAA DVD/DeCSS case(s).
> >
> > I'm aware of cases involving Sony v. Connectix, and RealNetworks v.
> > MP3.com (I think). The RealNetworks action appears to have been
> > dropped. What's the status of the Connectix case? Last action I'd
> > heard of was for a Sept 14, 1999 court date.
> >
> > There's also the Sony v. Bleem case.
> >
> > Nintendo has pursued actions of similar nature.
> >
> > Anything else?
>
> I don't think the grace period has expired yet. In 17 USC 1201 (a)
> the grace period is specificed as two years from the date of
> enactment which would make it October 28, 2000. There is
> currently a request for written comments on how this provision will
> impact legal uses. (Due by Feb. 10). For more info see the site
>
> http://www.loc.gov/copyright/1201/anticirc.html

It's important to note that the grace period applies *only* to 17 USC 1201(a). The MPAA cases in NY and CT are based on alleged violations of 1201(b), for which there is no grace period.

-- 
Karsten M. Self (kmself[_at_]ix.netcom.com)
    What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?

SAS for Linux: http://www.netcom.com/~kmself/SAS/SAS4Linux.html
Mailing list:  "subscribe sas-linux" to mailto:majordomo[_at_]cranfield.ac.uk