Freedom to Tinker is a blog run by David Robinson, the Associate Director of Princeton's Center for Information Technology Policy.  The blog was started by Professor Felten of Princeton, who is quite prominent to my topic as he was the professor who was forced to terminate his research on the vulnerabilities of the Secure Digital Music Initiative becasue of provisions of the DMCA.  The post that I am using as a source for my paper was written on October 27, 2008, in light of the ten year anniversary of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.  Robinson, clearly opposed to the anti-circumvention provisions, recalls with condemnation that just ten years ago, "the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions, which became 17 USC Section 1201, made it a crime under most circumstances to 'circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to' a copyrighted work."

Robinson discusses that companies could protect the content that they 'own' by placing arbitrary limitations on one's access to them, and that the federal government made it illegal to circumvent these technologies.  Even if it wasn't an infringement of the copyright per se, it still became a felony to access the content, regardless of how easy it may be. In this blog post, Robinson chronicles the procedure of passing the DMCA, and shows that its creators claimed to make the "information superhighway" more appealing to those who might have been hesitant of sharing their intellectual property.  Robinson maintains that even ten years after its pass in Congress, the DMCA's anti-circumvention clauses haven't reduced the ability to bypass DRMs.

An argument that Robinson points out, which is often ignored by proponents of the DMCA, is that although the DMCA was intended to meet standards set by the WIPO, those involved in the Clinton administration's efforts to create the DMCA were also essential in creating the WIPO standards.  This particular post focuses primarily on the problems with the passing of the legislation, and secondarily on the functions of the act itself.

This blog post is a great supplementary source because it is written by a respected professor who has been in the mix of the debate on the DMCA since its inception.  Furthermore, it is important for me to consider the political context in which this bill was passed; this has been lacking in a lot of the scholarly work at which I have looked.