this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2025
683 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
75551 readers
2138 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This entire thing has been made needlessly complicated. Easy fix though.
Oh you sweet summer child, judges will bend over backwards to slap people with multi-decade-to-life charges for 'hacking,' even if the 'hacking' is just the rightsholder accidentally presenting data to you.
They already ruled on this in favor of allowing you to back up what you already own. See video games, DVDs and CDs, video tapes, this is well established already.
They actually walked that back using blu-rays as an excuse. If there's any sort of DRM/encryption/etc, you're completely unallowed to circumvent it, even for personal backup.
To be fair, if you OCR the pages via camera, you haven't actually circumvented DRM. That means it's a completely legal backup, as the DRM on the original file was untouched and unaltered. This definitely does fall under fair use.
Theoretically, yes. Realistically, judges historically believe anything prosecutors tell them about hacking and circumvention.
There's been people thrown in jail for the rest of their life for the crime of clicking a public URL that the company didn't intend to be public.
Source?
The closest i've heard was a journalist being accused of hacking for the crime of choosing "view source" in the right-click menu of a web-browser.
If you scroll down a bit, I actually already answered that question in this exact threat, one reply down.
In general I agree, but I am going to have to ask you for a source on that last one.
Looks like I mixed up two different cases- the cause of one, and the duration of another.
weev (who apparently is a giant asshole) was the one who got sent to jail for accessing a completely public URL AT&T wished he didn't in 2010. The EFF took up his case. His sentence was later vacated by another court because so many civil rights lawyers kept joining his team pro-bono so the court tossed it out on a blatant technicality to get the issue to go away, so he only served ~2y.
As for the CFAA being used to slap people with life sentences, there's too many examples to know which one I was mixing it up with. Aaron Swartz is the classic example.
Still 2y more than he should've, geez...
You didn't circumvent it by breaking the encryption, but I'd say you still circumvented it.
Just do it in a country with reasonable laws
The goold old analog hole.