The controversial law, which prohibits people from using or distributing devices that can bypass copyrights and copy prevention measures, was the subject of two court decisions this week.
The DCMA was passed in 1998 and is keenly supported by the music and movie industry but criticised by civil liberties groups, including the EFF, which campaigns for civil liberties in the electronic age.
In New Jersey, a judge dismissed a case brought against the music industry by a university professor who sought to challenge the validity of legal threats made against him. Princeton University Professor Edward Felton sued the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) over its threats of legal action if he published his research into the flaws of copy prevention technologies. Felton argued that certain parts of the DCMA should be overturned for being unconstitutional.
However, the court found in favour of the RIAA, which was supported in the case by the US Department of Justice. The Justice Department had argued that Felten had published his results regardless of any concerns he had voiced.
In another case, Eric Corely, publisher of hacker magazine 2600, lost his case in a US Court of Appeal in which he sought to overturn an order made last summer which prohibits him from publishing or linking his web site to a DVD-cracking code. The case has been seen as a conflict between the right to free speech and copyright protection on the internet. Corley’s defence was led by the EFF.
The court upheld the provisions of the DCMA and was of the opinion that it did not run counter to the principles of free speech. It said: “The DCMA as applied to [Eric Corley’s] linking, served substantial governmental interests and was unrelated to the suppression of free speech.”