You didn’t circumvent it by breaking the encryption, but I’d say you still circumvented it.
Comment on Amazon is making it impossible to remove the DRM from Kindle Books
tomkatt@lemmy.world 4 weeks agoTo be fair, if you OCR the pages via camera, you haven’t actually circumvented DRM. That means it’s a completely legal backup, as the DRM on the original file was untouched and unaltered. This definitely does fall under fair use.
dermanus@lemmy.ca 4 weeks ago
ysjet@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Theoretically, yes. Realistically, judges historically believe anything prosecutors tell them about hacking and circumvention.
There’s been people thrown in jail for the rest of their life for the crime of clicking a public URL that the company didn’t intend to be public.
0x0@lemmy.zip 4 weeks ago
Source?
The closest i’ve heard was a journalist being accused of hacking for the crime of choosing “view source” in the right-click menu of a web-browser.
ysjet@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
If you scroll down a bit, I actually already answered that question in this exact threat, one reply down.
svcg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
In general I agree, but I am going to have to ask you for a source on that last one.
ysjet@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Looks like I mixed up two different cases the cause of one, and the duration of another- weev (who aparently turned out to be a giant asshole) was the one who got sent to jail for accessing a completely public URL AT&T wished he didn’t in 2010. The EFF took up his case. His sentence was later vacated because another court went ‘yeah no that’s bullshit,’ so he only served a year or two.
As for the CFAA being used to slap people with damages that are WAY too big, there’s too many examples to know which one I was mixing it up with. Aaron Swartz is the classic example.
0x0@lemmy.zip 4 weeks ago
Still 2y more than he should’ve, geez…