Live data from Hacker News

noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

github.com

11–20 of 173 posts

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#11
Damn. I rely on this software to read ebooks on my Remarkable tablet. I do this because I like giving at least a few pennies of royalty percentage to the author, and as far as I understand it, it's legal on my end to circumvent DRM for the sole purpose of interoperability for my legally-purchased content.

Of course, if they really don't want my money, there's always libgen.

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#12
post #2

noDRM's post on MobileRead: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4187904&pos...

Thanks. From the additional context in the link, it sounds like Readium might believe that this implementation is infringing on their proprietary ebook format code. I wonder if the taken down repo was a clean room implementation? If not they might have a case, if it looks similar

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#13
Looking at the python file they are complaining about, it simply implements the "encryption profile" that is mentioned. There is no circumvention; it still requires the user password. It is also clearly a novel implementation, so there is no copyright violation here. Their "algorithm" or whatever is obviously not protected under DMCA.

So this is totally bogus, again. Bonus points for the DMCA notice obviously not being written by a lawyer.

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#14
post #4

> I have taken fair use into consideration. This is always a fucking lie, and I wish we (as a community) would band together to make it more painful for giant companies to just spam DMCA takedowns as part of their DRM strategy. Ignoring the entire issue with the fact that there probably wasn't any copyrighted material in the repo to begin with and that code is speech, and speech is protected in the US - in other word…

As Italian, I think you should take my words with mistrust, but as far as I understood recently about US is that the speech is protected between the citizen and the government, not between civil entities, as business/corps and citizen

That said, I guess it was shortsighted from the founding father but I guess at the time people would be often oppressed by governments not by neighbors and friends and I think this is something we need to solve as it's the challenge of our times

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#15

> "The following git repository contain circumvention technology that enables users to illegally access ebooks protected by copyright:" Related: GitHub's statement from the last time they removed a prominent repository to a "circumvention technology" DMCA claim: https://github.blog/2020-11-16-standing-up-for-developers-yo... ( "Standing up for developers: youtube-dl is back" ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=251…

Section 1201 also makes it illegal to circumvent DRM measures or manufacture/import/provide tools that do.

> (2)No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that (A)is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;

Although, i'm not sure if DMCA notices commonly used for infringing content also work for violations of section 1201.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#16
post #4

> I have taken fair use into consideration. This is always a fucking lie, and I wish we (as a community) would band together to make it more painful for giant companies to just spam DMCA takedowns as part of their DRM strategy. Ignoring the entire issue with the fact that there probably wasn't any copyrighted material in the repo to begin with and that code is speech, and speech is protected in the US - in other word…

Unfortunately the DMCA also covers technology that works around DRM, not just copyright violation. Anyone wanting to share any anti-DRM software is advised to use a non-US site; GitHub probably doesn't have a choice about things like this once someone reports it.

The notice didn't claim copyright violation. It claimed (accurately) that this code worked around their DRM.

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#17

> "The following git repository contain circumvention technology that enables users to illegally access ebooks protected by copyright:" Related: GitHub's statement from the last time they removed a prominent repository to a "circumvention technology" DMCA claim: https://github.blog/2020-11-16-standing-up-for-developers-yo... ( "Standing up for developers: youtube-dl is back" ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=251…

Section 1201 also makes it illegal to circumvent DRM measures or manufacture/import/provide tools that do. > (2)No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that (A)is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work prote…

Implementing a DRM scheme is not circumventing it. No circumvention here, you still need the password.

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#18
post #2

noDRM's post on MobileRead: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4187904&pos...

Thanks. From the additional context in the link, it sounds like Readium might believe that this implementation is infringing on their proprietary ebook format code. I wonder if the taken down repo was a clean room implementation? If not they might have a case, if it looks similar

Doesn't matter if it is clean room or not. In the US, it isn't legal to share anti-DRM technology. Perhaps you could get some court to decide that this law violates the 1st Amendment, but that would be an uphill climb.

People shouldn't host anti-DRM stuff on any US site.

Re: noDRM's GitHub repo DeDRM_tools is disabled due to Readium's DMCA notice

#19
post #16
post #4

> I have taken fair use into consideration. This is always a fucking lie, and I wish we (as a community) would band together to make it more painful for giant companies to just spam DMCA takedowns as part of their DRM strategy. Ignoring the entire issue with the fact that there probably wasn't any copyrighted material in the repo to begin with and that code is speech, and speech is protected in the US - in other word…

Unfortunately the DMCA also covers technology that works around DRM, not just copyright violation. Anyone wanting to share any anti-DRM software is advised to use a non-US site; GitHub probably doesn't have a choice about things like this once someone reports it. The notice didn't claim copyright violation. It claimed (accurately) that this code worked around their DRM.

Except it started with:

> Yes, I am the copyright holder.

Post reply on HN