elektranine said:
All you have is shown that have a horrible comprehension of what is going oon. I’m sure the "it says on legal zoom" excuse will hold up in a court of law. In fact the website has a disclaimer "LegalZoom is not a law firm, and the employees of LegalZoom are not acting as your attorney. LegalZoom's legal document service is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. " The DMCA expressly forbids the manufacture, development, distribution, or possession of any tool, hardware or software, that circumvents copyright protection or allows the use of a copyrighted work contrary to the original intentions of the copyright holder. Sony "originally intended" for PS2 games to be played only on the PS2 console or devices specifically licensed to play PS2 games. It says so in their licensing terms. You cannot legally use these copyrighted works on the PC.
You are allowed to make a backup/copy for archival purposes only. You are not allowed to use the archival backup for production use. You cannot in any way use that archival backup to play the game. Also it should be noted that when making the backup you cannot circumvent any copyright protection scheme in doing so. |
There is no copyright protection scheme to bypass when ripping a bios from the PS2 or ripping a rom off the disc of a PS2 game (like I said, you don't even need to rip the iso, you can play from your DVD player.) There is no DRM on these contents, and therefore DMCA doesn't apply. The emulator doesn't bypass any DRM to play the games.
And what would be the point of an archival copy if you can't use it? That is bullshit. Fair-use allows people to use their copies for non-distributive activites. It has been the case for years when people were ripping songs of their CD's to play on their MP3 players. It wasn't until the companies starting putting DRM's on the content that they could take legal action. Before that, they couldn't do anything about it.
http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf
Can you source the underlined? I couldn't find that anywhere in the DMCA. In fact it says:
Section 1201 divides technological measures into two categories: measures that prevent unauthorized access to a copyrighted work and measures that prevent The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 “Copying” is used in this context as a short-hand for the exercise of any of the exclus- 2 ive rights of an author under section 106 of the Copyright Act. Consequently, a technological measure that prevents unauthorized distribution or public performance of a work would fall in this second category. Copyright Office Summary December 1998 Page 4 unauthorized copying of a copyrighted work. Making or selling devices or services that 2 are used to circumvent either category of technological measure is prohibited in certain circumstances, described below. As to the act of circumvention in itself, the provision prohibits circumventing the first category of technological measures, but not the second.
This distinction was employed to assure that the public will have the continued ability to make fair use of copyrighted works. Since copying of a work may be a fair use under appropriate circumstances, section 1201 does not prohibit the act of circumventing a technological measure that prevents copying. By contrast, since the fair use doctrine is not a defense to the act of gaining unauthorized access to a work, the act of circumventing a technological measure in order to gain access is prohibited. Section 1201 proscribes devices or services that fall within any one of the following three categories: ! they are primarily designed or produced to circumvent; ! they have only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent; or ! they are marketed for use in circumventing.
It says nothing about original intent.
