| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

AnalysisTwo

Page history last edited by PBworks 17 years, 3 months ago

Case One Analysis

 

Despite the exceptions made by the DMCA, the scientific community is still concerned about the negative effects that the DMCA might bring to scientific research. It is afraid that the DMCA could be used by some groups to stifle academic research, just as it threatened legitimate cryptographic research in this case of Felten v. RIAA. Before the DMCA became law in 1998, 49 computer security experts signed a letter (http://www.cerias.purdue.edu/homes/spaf/WIPO/index.html) in which they expressed the concern that the DMCA could “criminalize many current university courses and research in information security, and severely disrupt a growing American industry in information security technology” (Simons, 2001).

 

Although the DMCA does recognize the importance and legitimacy of security related scientific research, some events show that researchers' concerns are becoming reality. For example, Lee (2001a) reported that a prominent Dutch programmer and cryptographer refused to publish his research because he travels often to the United States and fears fates similar to either Sklyarov or Felten. In addition, according to Simons (2001), some computer security researchers have refused to attend conferences held in the U.S. and called to move other conferences outside the U.S. The Association for Computing Machinery expressed their concern that "the law does not address issues such as the robustness of a technological measure," so that "the publication of an analysis of flaws in a weak and poorly designed technology that is supposed to control access to a copyrighted work could be considered a violation of the DMCA" (Simons).

 

If the DMCA has the potential to be used by certain groups against research and academic freedom, then it is a detriment to the spirit and intention of the copyright law and even the American Constitution. As Cindy Cohn, the Legal Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) pointed out, "When scientists are intimidated from publishing their work, there is a clear First Amendment problem" (Albanese, 2001).

 

In addition to the threats against research and free speech, the case of Felten v. RIAA has another implication: for many researchers (authors in the academic field), the purpose for scientific research is not for monetary benefit, but pursuing truth, promoting scientific knowledge, being recognized, enjoying the pleasure of publishing, and sharing their discoveries with colleagues and the public. In this sense, overprotection of authors' rights is not what many academic authors need, but what the big corporations want because in many cases, the copyright holders are not the real authors, but commercial publishers. By signing "Copyright Transfer Agreements" or the like, authors have given away their copyrights to publishers before publishing. Therefore, more often than not, the DMCA is not protecting authors’ rights, but actually protecting big corporations and commercial publishers. While claiming to be protecting copyright in the digital environment, the DMCA might also be hindering scholarly communication.

 

Back to Academia

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.