Slashdot is discussing the legality of DeCSS in this thread. DeCSS allows DVD owners to bypass the CSS copy-control mechanisms in DVDs. One of the issues is whether software can be considered "speech". If so, then the software is subject to First Amendment protections. In that case, banning a program (like DeCSS) would be like banning speech; it's something that courts can do, but there has to be very good evidence that the banned speech will directly cause a lot of harm.
jamus has an intersting point regarding software as "speech" in this post:
If computer programs aren't expressive speach, then according to the Copyright office's website, it won't be covered under copyright law. See Circular 1, which lists Copyrightable works. They don't have a category for compute programs, but make this recommendation:
For example, computer programs and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary works"
It goes further by saying that "works that have not been fixed in a tangible form of expression" "are generally not eligible for federal copyright protection".
So, if programs aren't expressive speach, then where does that leave the copyright status of the million of computer programs out there? Is that a Pandora's box that the court wants to open?
Now, I'm not a copyright lawyer, so I'm not sure where or if this is in actual law. If anybody else knows, I'll be interested in hearing Slashdot is discussing the legality of DeCSS in this thread. DeCSS allows DVD owners to bypass the CSS copy-control mechanisms in DVDs. One of the issues is whether software can be considered "speech". If so, then the software is subject to First Amendment protections. In that case, banning a program (like DeCSS) would be like banning speech; it's something that courts can do, but there has to be very good evidence that the banned speech will directly cause a lot of harm.
jamus has an intersting point regarding software as "speech" in this post:
If computer programs aren't expressive speach, then according to the Copyright office's website, it won't be covered under copyright law. See Circular 1, which lists Copyrightable works. They don't have a category for compute programs, but make this recommendation:
For example, computer programs and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary works"
It goes further by saying that "works that have not been fixed in a tangible form of expression" "are generally not eligible for federal copyright protection".
So, if programs aren't expressive speach, then where does that leave the copyright status of the million of computer programs out there? Is that a Pandora's box that the court wants to open?
Now, I'm not a copyright lawyer, so I'm not sure where or if this is in actual law. If anybody else knows, I'll be interested in hearing