EFF.org: 46 Law Professors Say DMCA Unconstitutional

[ Thanks to Bryan Taylor for this link. ]

"Amici are law professors who teach and write about intellectual property law at law schools within the United States . We care deeply about the fundamental constitutional principles underlying United States intellectual property law, and are committed to ensuring that intellectual property law continues to develop in accordance with these principles. We have no interest in the outcome of this litigation except as it pertains to these concerns. This case raises a number of important questions concerning the interpretation and constitutionality of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's (DMCA) provisions barring the manufacture, importation, and distribution of technologies capable of circumventing technological protections applied to copyrighted works... (hereinafter the "anti-device provisions"). We write only to address whether the anti-device provisions are a proper exercise of congressional authority under the intellectual property power, the commerce power, or the power to enact laws that are necessary and proper to effectuate these other powers... We believe that they are not."

"SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT
Congress may legislate only pursuant to a power specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Neither the text nor the legislative history of the DMCA indicates which power Congress relied on to enact the anti-device provisions. Even if Congress had specified a particular source of constitutional authority, however, it would not matter. The DMCA's anti-device provisions are not a valid exercise of any of Congress' enumerated powers. They prohibit devices without regard for originality, duration of copyright, or infringement of copyright in the underlying, technologically-protected work; therefore, they are not a valid exercise of the intellectual property power. Nor are they a lawful exercise of the necessary and proper power or the commerce power, because they contravene specific limits on Congress' power under the Intellectual Property Clause. As a separate ground of invalidity, the anti-device provisions also violate limits on the scope of copyright protection required by the First Amendment."

Complete Story

Related Stories:

• PoliTechBot.com: Friend of Court Brief: News Orgs Say DeCSS Ruling Infringes Freedom of Press(Jan 26, 2001)
• Cryptome.org: Friend of Court Brief: DeCSS is a copyrightable literary work; DMCA cited to prove it(Jan 25, 2001)
• CNET News.com: ISP won't unplug Web site showing DVD-cracking code(Jan 24, 2001)
• 32BitsOnline: EFF Asks Court For Relief In DVD Encryption Info Ban(Jan 19, 2001)
• USA Today: Pamela Samuelson: Cyber-rights guardian; Copyright "Antichrist"(Jan 03, 2001)
• The Register: MS claims copyright on Windows bugs; seeks to block BugTraq(Dec 08, 2000)
• NY Times: Copyright Office Backs Ban on Code-Breaking Software(Oct 30, 2000)
• NewsForge: EFF takes its DVD case to Linux users, looking to raise funds(Sep 15, 2000)
• SJ Mercury: Digital Copyright Act comes back to haunt consumers(Aug 29, 2000)
• The Guardian (UK): Freenet takes music copyright battle to US(Aug 02, 2000)
• EFF.org: DVD Update: EFF Detonates Mind Bomb in Court on Final Day of DVD Trial(Jul 26, 2000)
• CNET News.com: Hollywood looks to kill hyperlinks in copyright fights(Jul 26, 2000)