The DMCA is an amendment to title 17 (Copyright Act).  Bill Clinton signed it into law on October 28th, 1998.  The DMCA actually implemented treatises from the World Intellectual Property Treaty (WIPO).  The goal of the act was to give copyright owners protection with the oncoming digital advances.  It enforced the treatises in the international treaty.

The DMCA is split up into five different titles.  They are

Title Io WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treatises Implementation Act of 1998
This put the treaties from WIPO into action.
Title IIo Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act
Gives Internet Service Providers protection from copyright infringement under certain circumstances.
Title IIIo Computer Maintenance Competition Assurance Act
Outlines Exemptions:  In the case then you need to copy a computer program by activating a computer because of a repair.
Title IVo Miscellaneous Provisions
Title Vo Vessel Hull Design Protection Act
Created a new form of protection for the design of vessel hulls

This summary of the DMCA is critical to my paper.  My paper is reallly centered on the DMCA and its affects on fair use and free speech.  In order to discuss the problems with the DMCA I must discuss its provisions and how it is supposed to work.  Then I will outsline what should be changed.

    This is essentially what most of my paper is about – the application of the DMCA to YouTube’s existence as a business hosting thousands of copyright-infringing videos.  Without this, YouTube would be liable for costs that would probably put it to bankruptcy.  In the case between Viacom and YouTube, YouTube claims protection by the DMCA in Section 512(c), which was designed to protect commercial Web-hosting services, which feared they might be held responsible for posting habits of users.  YouTube essentially serves as storage of content at the direction of its users, it is able to find shelter in the same safe harbor that Web-hosting companies do.
    The Act lists the requirements under which YouTube must fall in order to have limited liability for infringing material on their servers.  These include that the provider not have prior knowledge of infringing activity, is able to control any infringing activity , not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to infringing activity.  Also if service provider receives a proper notification of claimed infringement, action must be taken to either remove or block access to that content.  
    In my paper, these criteria will have to be applied to the Viacom v. YouTube case to determine if YouTube in fact, is liable.  The idea of apparent knowledge must be determined, as it is obvious that YouTube is aware of the activity, but what is to be done about this?  While there should not be any financial benefit to the service provider related to infringing activity, YouTube is known to be a platform for many ads, which leads to the question if these ads a truly independent of the content.  Finally, YouTube’s method of addressing copyright notifications is important in determining the legality of its operations.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 is relevant to my topic because it addresses webcasting and royalty fees. In it, Congress wanted to promote Internet radio as a competitive form of entertainment that benefits the recording industry by generating royalties and promoting sales of sound recordings. Section IV of the act includes Webcasting Amendments to the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings. Under the amendments, webcasters must pay licensing fees to record companies. In order for radio stations to transmit music, they need the permission from the owners of the musical work, usually the songwriter or composer, and the owners of the song recordings themselves, usually a record label. While traditional radio stations pay a flat fee for each song, this is not the case with internet radio stations. Traditional radio stations only have to pay a composer royalty fee. Internet radio stations are responsible for paying a composer royalty fee and a performance royalty fee, according to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. This act declares that internet radio is an entirely different market than traditional radio and uses this justification to explain the differing royalty fees.

This act is important to my paper because it distinguishes traditional radio stations from internet radio stations. When considering both, it seems that they are more similar than different, but this act does not recognize this to be the case. Internet radio stations have to pay higher royalty fees than traditional radio stations. This act strengthens my argument because these discrepancies should be accounted for since this is completely unfair. The royalty rates for internet radio should be decreased and be much closer to the rates of traditional radio stations. This argument is used by many internet radio corporations who believe the increase in royalty rates by the Copyright Royalty Board is unreasonable.

This memorandum summarizes briefly each title of the DMCA; it provides an overview of the law’s provisions although for purposes of length and readability a significant amount of detail has been omitted.  Overall, it renders the more technical language and organization of the law itself into a much more straightforward form.  The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States copyright law, created by the Copyright Office,  which implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization.  The DMCA was created as a way for copyright law to be adapted to the questions raised by digital technologies.  The most controversial section of the DMCA added a Chapter 12 to Title 17 of the United States Code; this section contains the infamous "anticircumvention provisions", criminalizing any attempt to break through digital copy protection (CSS encryption on DVDs, etc.).   Another section of the law removes any liability for online copyright violations from online service providers as long as they adhere to certain broad guidelines. There is also the possibility of application for exemptions from the DMCA for non-infringing uses, which require circumvention of encryption.

Under the Clinton administration, the DMCA was passed in an attempt by congress to address emerging digital technological advances that threatened copyrighted material.  American copyright laws were quickly becoming outdated and often useless.  Thus, Congress decided to move these areas of legislation into the digital age. The DMCA put a ban on any implement (both physical instrument and software) whose intended function was the circumvention of copyright safeguards. This legislation targeted devices such as VCRs, but focused mainly upon burgeoning internet technology such as peer-to-peer clients. DMCA Title II, for example, provides safe harbor to Internet Service Providers that comply and adhere to copyright guidelines, and agree to block the access of users who are shown to be committing copyright infringement.

This memorandum is extremely valuable to my overall project because the DMCA is an essential element in the MPAA’s campaigns against cinematic piracy and copyright infringement.  The DMCA provides the guidelines for piracy and digital technologies and therefore this memorandum will be a crucial asset to the basis of my final paper.

This memorandum summarizes briefly each title of the DMCA; it provides an overview of the law’s provisions although for purposes of length and readability a significant amount of detail has been omitted.  Overall, it renders the more technical language and organization of the law itself into a much more straightforward form.  The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States copyright law, created by the Copyright Office,  which implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization.  The DMCA was created as a way for copyright law to be adapted to the questions raised by digital technologies.  The most controversial section of the DMCA added a Chapter 12 to Title 17 of the United States Code; this section contains the infamous "anticircumvention provisions", criminalizing any attempt to break through digital copy protection (CSS encryption on DVDs, etc.).   Another section of the law removes any liability for online copyright violations from online service providers as long as they adhere to certain broad guidelines. There is also the possibility of application for exemptions from the DMCA for non-infringing uses, which require circumvention of encryption.

Under the Clinton administration, the DMCA was passed in an attempt by congress to address emerging digital technological advances that threatened copyrighted material.  American copyright laws were quickly becoming outdated and often useless.  Thus, Congress decided to move these areas of legislation into the digital age. The DMCA put a ban on any implement (both physical instrument and software) whose intended function was the circumvention of copyright safeguards. This legislation targeted devices such as VCRs, but focused mainly upon burgeoning internet technology such as peer-to-peer clients. DMCA Title II, for example, provides safe harbor to Internet Service Providers that comply and adhere to copyright guidelines, and agree to block the access of users who are shown to be committing copyright infringement.

This memorandum is extremely valuable to my overall project because the DMCA is an essential element in the MPAA’s campaigns against cinematic piracy and copyright infringement.  The DMCA provides the guidelines for piracy and digital technologies and therefore this memorandum will be a crucial asset to the basis of my final paper.

This is a summary of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 released by the Copyright Office. The DMCA was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. It is divided into five titles.

• Title 1: WIPO TREATY IMPLEMENTATION implements the WIPO treaties. The title makes several technical amendments regarding national eligibility, restoration of copyright protection and registration as a prerequisite to suit. Although the title provides exceptions, the title essentially prohibits the production/services of copyright-protection circumvention tools. Further it prohibits the distribution of such tools/services.
  
• Title 2: ONLINE COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT LIABILITY LIMITATION. The title essentially provides a safe-harbor for online service providers as long as they meet certain provisions of the title. It establishes for classes of online services: transitory communictations, system caching, storage of information on systems or networks at the direction of users, and information location tools. In general as long as a service provider does not have requisite knowledge of infringing material, does not recieve financial gain attributable to infringing activity, and further more once the service provider is notified of infringing material it must act fast to take down or block access to such material.
  
• Title 3: Computer Maintenaince or Repair. This title basically says that an owner of a computer or a lessee doing maintenance or repair on the computer is excempt from copyright infringement if a situation arrises during which one must make a copy of a program for back up purposes. However the original copy must have been lawfully owned and further once all repair/maintenance has been finished the back up copy must be destroyed.
  
• Title 4: MISCELANIOUS PROVISIONS. This title further clarifies certain existing provisons and implements new ones regarding broadcast excemptions, library and archive excemptions among other things.
  
• Title 5: PROTECTION OF CERTAIN ORIGINAL DESIGNS. This title primarily deals with the protection of vessel hull designs.
  

This source is very valuable for my reseach paper. Specifically Titles 1 and 2 are going to be analyzed and used in my research paper. Title 1 is important in 1 crucial way. Although it may be a leap, in the sense of a legal court room, but I believe that the following analysis can be seen valid. IsoHunt and other similar websites link to/index .torrent files that allow users to download ISOs. ISOs are images of original CDs or DVDs. Now given that the DMCA prohibits the circumvention of encrypted DVDs, and other content such as software, these ISOs are illegal according to Title 1 of the DMCA. IsoHunt and other similar websites allow users to search for and download such ISOs. The title of the website itself: "IsoHunt"  suggests that the primary purpose of it is to "hunt" for "Iso"s. Title 2 is important for my paper because site operators such as Gary Fung (see affidavit no.1) often claim that as long as they follow the safe harbor provisions established by Title 2 of the DMCA, they may not be held liable for contributory infringement. Thus in my research paper I plan to make careful analyses of both these safe-harbor provisions and the claims of site operators. Title 2 is also important because many other important sources that will be used directly deal with this title.

United States Copyright Office.  The Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998: U.S. Copyright Office Summary.  United States Copyright Office.  28 November 2006. .

This is a summary of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, created by the Copyright Office. It renders the more technical language and organization of the law itself into a much more straightforward form. It definitely says something about the polarizing nature of the DMCA that the only article which I have come across without a very strong, clear viewpoint of the subject is a pure summary; as could be expected, the Copyright Office is attempting to maintain an objective viewpoint, to whatever degree possible.

The DMCA was created as a way in which copyright law could be adapted to the questions raised by digital technologies. The most controversial section of the DMCA added a Chapter 12 to Title 17 of the United States Code; this section contains the much-talked-about "anticircumvention provisions", criminalizing any attempt to break through digital copy protection (CSS encryption on DVDs, etc.). Another section of law removes any liability for online copyright violations from online service providers as long as they adhere to certain broad guidelines. There is also the possibility of application for exemptions from the DMCA for non-infringing uses which require circumvention of encryption.

My project requires a detailed knowledge of the provisions of the DMCA itself; I not only plan to quote directly from the DMCA in my project, but also to use clips appropriated from DVDs to create the project. This summary of the law is one of the most simple and concise descriptions of its provisions, without much color in the form of personal opinions.

United States Copyright Office.  The Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998: U.S. Copyright Office Summary.  United States Copyright Office.  28 November 2006. .

This is a summary of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, created by the Copyright Office. It renders the more technical language and organization of the law itself into a much more straightforward form. It definitely says something about the polarizing nature of the DMCA that the only article which I have come across without a very strong, clear viewpoint of the subject is a pure summary; as could be expected, the Copyright Office is attempting to maintain an objective viewpoint, to whatever degree possible.

The DMCA was created as a way in which copyright law could be adapted to the questions raised by digital technologies. The most controversial section of the DMCA added a Chapter 12 to Title 17 of the United States Code; this section contains the much-talked-about "anticircumvention provisions", criminalizing any attempt to break through digital copy protection (CSS encryption on DVDs, etc.). Another section of law removes any liability for online copyright violations from online service providers as long as they adhere to certain broad guidelines. There is also the possibility of application for exemptions from the DMCA for non-infringing uses which require circumvention of encryption.

My project requires a detailed knowledge of the provisions of the DMCA itself; I not only plan to quote directly from the DMCA in my project, but also to use clips appropriated from DVDs to create the project. This summary of the law is one of the most simple and concise descriptions of its provisions, without much color in the form of personal opinions.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, passed in 1998 under the Clinton administration, was an attempt by congress to address new and emerging technological advances that threatened copyrighted material. Congress, deciding that the Nation's copyright laws were becoming antiquated and often usless, decided to advance a project to move these areas of legislation into the digital age. The DMCA put a ban on any implement (both physical instrument and software) whose intended function was the circumvention of copyright safeguards. This legislation targeted devices such as VCRs, which were required to include copy prevention built-in, but focused even more on burgeoning internet technology such as peer-to-peer clients. DMCA Title II, for example, provides safe harbor to Internet Service Providers that comply and adhere to copyright guidelines, and agree to block the access of users who are shown to be committing copyright infringement. 

As much as this legislation tries to protect works from being copyrighted in this new technological age, it is simultaneously hurting independent creators from distributing their content through one of the few networks they have left.  Because copyright law has grown so much over the century, artists without fiscal resources to clear the ever expanding copyrights would often simply not create at all, or choose not to distribute their creations for fear of consequential lawsuits.  But with the invention of the internet, authors and artists suddenly have a new way to get their work out to the public.  The internet is a world-wide market where anyone can post and make available virtually anything.  However, the DMCA is limiting the potential use of this valuable and incredible resource by allowing and facilitating the searching and taking down of every small bit of copyright infringement.  If things continue in this direction, creativity and innovation will have no market or means of distribution.

United States Copyright Office.  The Digital Millenium Copyright Act of 1998: U.S. Copyright Office Summary.  United States Copyright Office.  28 November 2006. <http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf>.

This is a summary of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, created by the Copyright Office. It renders the more technical language and organization of the law itself into a much more straightforward form. It definitely says something about the polarizing nature of the DMCA that the only article which I have come across without a very strong, clear viewpoint of the subject is a pure summary; as could be expected, the Copyright Office is attempting to maintain an objective viewpoint, to whatever degree possible.

The DMCA was created as a way in which copyright law could be adapted to the questions raised by digital technologies. The most controversial section of the DMCA added a Chapter 12 to Title 17 of the United States Code; this section contains the much-talked-about "anticircumvention provisions", criminalizing any attempt to break through digital copy protection (CSS encryption on DVDs, etc.). Another section of law removes any liability for online copyright violations from online service providers as long as they adhere to certain broad guidelines. There is also the possibility of application for exemptions from the DMCA for non-infringing uses which require circumvention of encryption.

My project requires a detailed knowledge of the provisions of the DMCA itself; I not only plan to quote directly from the DMCA in my project, but also to use clips appropriated from DVDs to create the project. This summary of the law is one of the most simple and concise descriptions of its provisions, without much color in the form of personal opinions.