Realistically, if this bill were to pass unamended, it'd be a massive, massive win for consumers and technologists. The odds are stacked massively against us.
When the DMCA was passed, it was considered a "grand bargain" between the content industry and ISPs/websites that allow user-generated content. In exchange for not being directly liable for content their users post (the safe-harbor provisions), the content industry were granted the anti-circumvention provisions.
As far as Google (in particular Youtube), Yahoo, AT&T are concerned, the safe-harbor provisions are absolutely fine as they are. The content industry argues that they put a big burden on them by requiring them to scan and find infringing content, and have repeatedly pushed to have the safe-harbor provision weakened.
Regarding Section 1201 of "anti-circumvention" there really isn't a single large lobby of folks who would want to push to have them weakened. Microsoft, game developers, and other traditional software companies rely heavily on DRM, and companies like Apple would rather not have their devices jailbroken. And Google et al. don't want to disturb the existing peace with the content producers - they think that opening up the DMCA in any way opens up an opportunity for content producers to weaken the safe-harbor provisions.
As such, the only people pushing for DMCA reform are small independent groups like mine, folks like Kyle Wiens at iFixit, and a handful of security researchers and public interest groups. The content lobby can easily throw a few dozen million at a lobbying effort to quash our efforts if they think they'd increase piracy in any way shape or form, as the potential harm that could come to them from an increase in piracy is massive. And carriers and electronics manufacturers don't stand to gain by allowing things like unlocking and jailbreaking.
That being said, there's really no good argument for anti-circumvention applying in cases where there's clearly no copyright infringement. So our hope is that common sense and advocacy campaigns like the one we're running now will carry the day.
Yes, which is what makes this merely a good start, where "good start" is defined as "any change in favor of the citizen." Parity is still a long way away; consider that the law is now almost 15 years old. Will it take another 15 years for another step in this direction to be taken?
When the DMCA was passed, it was considered a "grand bargain" between the content industry and ISPs/websites that allow user-generated content. In exchange for not being directly liable for content their users post (the safe-harbor provisions), the content industry were granted the anti-circumvention provisions.
As far as Google (in particular Youtube), Yahoo, AT&T are concerned, the safe-harbor provisions are absolutely fine as they are. The content industry argues that they put a big burden on them by requiring them to scan and find infringing content, and have repeatedly pushed to have the safe-harbor provision weakened.
Regarding Section 1201 of "anti-circumvention" there really isn't a single large lobby of folks who would want to push to have them weakened. Microsoft, game developers, and other traditional software companies rely heavily on DRM, and companies like Apple would rather not have their devices jailbroken. And Google et al. don't want to disturb the existing peace with the content producers - they think that opening up the DMCA in any way opens up an opportunity for content producers to weaken the safe-harbor provisions.
As such, the only people pushing for DMCA reform are small independent groups like mine, folks like Kyle Wiens at iFixit, and a handful of security researchers and public interest groups. The content lobby can easily throw a few dozen million at a lobbying effort to quash our efforts if they think they'd increase piracy in any way shape or form, as the potential harm that could come to them from an increase in piracy is massive. And carriers and electronics manufacturers don't stand to gain by allowing things like unlocking and jailbreaking.
That being said, there's really no good argument for anti-circumvention applying in cases where there's clearly no copyright infringement. So our hope is that common sense and advocacy campaigns like the one we're running now will carry the day.