The New York Association of Copyright Stakeholders NYASCH, formerly referred to as "New Yorkers for Fair Use", has recently taken on this new identity in order to distinguish itself from the activities of NYFU. Additional information can be viewed on our history page.

© Copyright for the Digital Millennium
All material copyrighted by Ruben Safir and contributors.

NY Fairuse members, and NYLUG members:

It seems that quite a bit of coverage of the DVD trail is taking hold 
in the media.  I even saw an article on this in the NY Post, although 
it failed to mention the protest.

We got fairly lucky on the protest because I ran into Jerrold Nadler,
who is the Congressman for the Upper West Side and Boro Park in
Brooklyn.  He may be the Representative of many of you in Manhattan. 
I used to live in his district, but I no longer do.

We need to now strike a legislative dialog with Nadler.  To me, he's 
one of the best representatives in the state.  He's usually informed, 
bright and and unafraid to take a position.

We must start a legislative movement to protect Fair Use.  Clearly,
the provisions in the DMCA of 1998 designed to protect Fair Use and
property rights are being run roughshod by the Kaplan Court.  Most
importantly, this quote by the MPAA is offensive.  It is reported by
CNET at:

"DeCSS is simply the 'lock pick' in the high-tech crime of breaking 
into another person's digital property," the MPAA said in a statement 
posted on its Web site.  "The First Amendment (the legal right to 
free speech) provides no protection for such conduct." 

We need Congress to pass a law and for Nadler's office to put forward 
a bill which reinforces "Fair Use" in statutory law, reinforcing its
constitutional status as the rights of the public.

First, we need a law which explicitly makes clear that a normal 
retail transaction for a physical copy of any media gives possession 
as property of that disk to the purchaser of the disk, just like it 
does with a pair of shoes.  Therefore, the analogy that someone picks 
a lock of something that they actually own can be ended both legally 
and philosophically.  One is allowed to pick the lock of something 
they OWN.  Since a DVD is purchased without a negotiated contract, 
in a simple cash transaction, the ownership of the lock of the DVD 
is in the hands of the disk owner.

Secondly, we need a law which explicitly gives the owners of media 
which contain copyrighted material, explicit "Fair Use" protection 
and "Reverse Engineering" protection which explicitly takes priority 
over any DMCA protections, or any other protections.  Despite the 
attempt of Congress to include "Fair Use" protection in the DMCA, 
without which the law would not have been passed by Congress, the 
law was written against itself in section 1201 and Judge Kaplan is 
ignoring these protections in the Courtroom.  As such, these "Fair 
Use" protections must be reinforced and made clear.  It must be 
clear that prior authorization of the Copyright holder is not needed 
by those attempting reverse engineering of Fair Use.

Thirdly, we should empower the Copyright Office to remove Copyright
protection from any individual who abuses Copyright to the detriment 
of Fair Use through frivolous lawsuits.  Copyright should be removed 
from any company which has abused its limited license to monopoly 
control of Copyrighted material by preventing the educational process 
or economic development through reverse engineering.  Teeth need to 
be put into the law to prevent abuse of power.

Lastly, we need a change in Copyright which allows for the ending of
Copyright of software and content which is no longer available from 
the Copyright holder at a fair market price.  This will force software
companies to continue to make available important business software 
and end the unfair forced upgrade of working products and games, or to 
hand over control of them to people who see a reason to do so.