YODA Back, It Is: Law To Let You Actually Own Your Devices Even When Copyright Gets In The Way
from the a-good-start dept
Last year, we wrote about Rep. Blake Farenthold introducing a small, but important piece of copyright legislation, the You Own Devices Act (YODA), which just says that if you buy some piece of computerized equipment, you can sell it with any included software, without having to get permission from the software provider. As we noted, the reality is that this is just making it clear that the first sale doctrine applies to computer equipment too -- which shouldn't need a new law, but some tech companies (especially in the networking space) feel otherwise.Farenthold has now reintroduced YODA, this time with Rep. Jared Polis as a sponsor as well (giving the bill that necessary "bi-partisan" shine). It's unfortunate that these kinds of bills are even necessary, but such is the state of copyright laws today, that they often mean the devices you buy, you don't even really own.
Also, kudos to Farenthold for playing on the YODA name in his tweet announcing the new version of the bill:
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blake farenthold, copyright, devices, dmca, first sale, jared polis, ownership, software, yoda
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Hmmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i cannot believe it has taken so long to get back in the offing. even worse, i cannot believe it was needed in the first place! why the hell should anything you have purchased, not be yours? worse still, continue to be owned by and controlled by the section of the Entertainment Industry who not only sold it, but did whatever they possibly could to get people to buy it? and even more so if the original purchaser wanted to sell it? the world, thanks to American politicians stupidity, has made the whole world one big entertainment industries plaything!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He will be murdered for this device, by someone who couldn't otherwise afford it.
This legislation means that police won't be able to pile on charges related to the unauthorized transfer of the firmware. Why does Mike Masnick hate copyright?
More seriously though, suppose the device has parameters custom-tailored for the rich guy - burned into the firmware to prevent hacking. If transferring altered firmware is illegal, when the rich guy finally dies, the device couldn't be donated - and the parameters altered for - a new and less wealthy user.
With wearable health monitoring tech already in use, this is rapidly leaving the realm of science fiction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I would guess the period of time that such tech will be available only to the rich will be fairly brief. That tends to be the way of things, and such trends are generally accelerating.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So I guess murder in the future will carry no charge huh? Get your head out of your ass, murder will still be murder, and being able to pile on bs charges would make no difference to a case like this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I think you'll want to get your sarcasm detector checked out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Makers beware
We'd still need specific exemptions to the DMCA from the Librarian of Congress to mod a game console, thermostat, refrigerator, etc. Or we'd need another law that generally allows decoupling the provided firmware from the device.
Someone please tell me if I'm wrong here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Makers beware
Yes, you're right, but baby steps...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tell me again why this bill is necessary. That link to bizjournal tells the story of of an outfit that fought back and won treble damages. Isn't that setting legal precedent? Is the US legal system today so fucked up that you now need an individual bill for every possible action not yet specifically allowed by another existing bill?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Turning a blind eye
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright infringement?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Copyright infringement?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Better go with the insanity defense.
You're all nuts. Welcome to the twilight zone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ROFL! Brilliant!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]