This paper discusses different perverse consequences of the DMCA.  Lee says that when Congress was trying to prepare for new digital technology, it made a mistake.  When the DMCA was passed, the courts were cut out of its role.  The universal band on technology and devices that “circumvent” digital rights management technologies (DRM) leave no role for the courts.  This lack of balance has created a system for consumers with limited options. The copyright owners now completely control things like Internet streaming and playback devices.  There is even evidence of certain firms utilizing the DMCA as a means of stopping research and reverse engineering.  

The DMCA also eliminates competition.  The copyright owners and companies that issue their content have the power the lock out competitors.  Also, digital rights management technologies tend to be ineffective and do little to stop pirates.  Instead DRM technologies make it harder for people making fair use out of the copyrighted work.

The paper says that there were in fact legal happenings in play before the DMCA enactment.  These legal processes were leading to a balanced body of law that would involve the courts.  Consumer choice, fair use, and competition would not be decreased as they are with the DMCA.  The budding body of law would give rights back to the people instead of depending on the technology design.  Really, without the DMCA we would be okay.  

Lee says that people should not have to worry about coming out with a new technology and getting sued because it is illegal according to the DMCA.  That undermines the goals of copyright.  This is a key point of my paper.  This article is extremely helpful in arguing my case.  The effects of the DMCA decrease consumer rights and options.  It also stifles creativity.  No one wants to come up with new technology wondering if they’re going to get sued for it.

This article by Author Timothy B. discusses what the DMCA has unintentionally done with anit-piracy or anticircumvention measures; it has created a lack of innovation due to these technology protection measures that are only fairly effective and do not solve the problems the MPAA faces.  Lee begins with a quote from Robert Frost: "good fences make good neighbors" (2). It's pretty safe to say that fences are effective in establishing and maintaining private property rights. In this scenario, digital rights management, the technical measures placed on digital media such as CD's and DVD's, are the fences of intellectual property and copyright. DRM provides content owners a strict level of control not previously available under copyright law - control that hinders the creativity and free thinking that tech firms employ in order to revolutionize and expand their products. The article discusses how plenty of new technologies have allowed customers to purchase and view media in brand new ways, ways that the film studios don't always immediately condone. In the past, Hollywood has been very hesitant towards new technologies, from cable, to the VCR, to DVD's and now the internet.

In discussing the fight against piracy, the author identifies three significant actions that Hollywood and the recording industry take (or have taken) to deter and reduce the act: lawsuits, PR campaigns, and digital rights managment technology. These actions may keep someone who is not technologically informed from committing piracy, but for the most part these solutions have done little to help in the fight.

The DMCA's anticircumvention provisions have created many problems, including the unhealthy corporate misuse of the DMCA in trying to destroy competition.  Not only are competitive tech firms brushed aside under this act, but academic research has been stymied (again, by corporate bullies who don't want product flaws and misrepresentations to go public).  Under the DMCA, too much power is put in the wrong hands, hands that want only to protect their 'property' and possible financial revenues.

This article is important to my research as it identifies the adverse effects the DMCA has had on technology industries, consumers, and scientific and academic research. My thesis aims to discuss how the Motion Picture Association labels piracy as the biggest threat to the motion picture industry and how that thinking can be seen as short-sighted and incorrect. Lack of innovation caused by technology protection measures under the DMCA is the biggest threat. This article really spells out what the DMCA has unintentionally done and will help me make my point in regards to illustrating how anti-piracy or anticircumvention measures are only fairly effective, and don't address the real problems that the MPA faces.

Author Timothy B. Lee opens the article with a quote from Robert Frost: "good fences make good neighbors" (2). It's pretty safe to say that fences are effective in establishing and maintaining private property rights. In this scenario, digital rights management, the technical measures placed on digital media such as CD's and DVD's, are the fences of intellectual property and copyright. DRM provides content owners a strict level of control not previously available under copyright law - control that hinders the creativity and free thinking that tech firms employ in order to revolutionize and expand their products. The article discusses how plenty of new technologies have allowed customers to purchase and view media in brand new ways, ways that the film studios don't always immediately condone. In the past, Hollywood has been very hesitant towards new technologies, from cable, to the VCR, to DVD's and now the internet.

In discussing the fight against piracy, the author identifies three significant actions that Hollywood and the recording industry take (or have taken) to deter and reduce the act: lawsuits, PR campaigns, and digital rights managment technology. These actions may keep someone who is not technologically informed from committing piracy, but for the most part these solutions have done little to help in the fight.

The DMCA's anticircumvention provisions have created many problems, including the unhealthy corporate misuse of the DMCA in trying to destroy competition.  Not only are competitive tech firms brushed aside under this act, but academic research has been stymied (again, by corporate bullies who don't want product flaws and misrepresentations to go public).  Under the DMCA, too much power is put in the wrong hands, hands that want only to protect their 'property' and possible financial revenues.