On March 4 congressional representative Zoe Lofgren from California submitted house resolution 1066, a bill entitled "Benefit Authors without Limiting Advancement or Net Consumer Expectations Act of 2003." The Balance Act seeks to amend title 17 of United State copy right code in hopes of clarifying controversial copyright issues associated with the much hyped and often hated Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Regardless of one's political thoughts, this legislation being sponsored by Lofgren offers hope in this age of digital uncertainty.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act

The DMCA was enacted to protect copyrights on digitally published materials, such as compact discs and DVD movies. The act was originally founded upon the principle of securing and protecting copyrighted material from both online and physical piracy. While the basis of the DMCA is positive in regards to upholding well established legalities, the bill has far reaching implications with blind regard for consumers' rights.

The DMCA essentially restricts nearly all copying or backup of copyrighted information. For example, it would be illegal to copy the contents of an audio compact disc to a compressed format sound file so that the music could be enjoyed on a portable MP3 player. While most anyone owning a MP3 player performs this process nearly everyday, the actual techniques involved are questionable when correlated to the text of the DMCA legislation.

Thousands of articles both in support and in hatred of the DMCA have published of the past few years. The fundamentals of the bill have been argued at all levels of government, though the vast majority of consumers are still puzzled when referencing the often cryptic text set forth in copyright act. Needless to say, the complexity of the issue is compounded due to varying legal interpretations from each side of the argument.

The most influential support of the DMCA is found within the powerful lobbying group known as the Motion Picture Association of America. The MPAA actively lobbies for DMCA support within the governmental arena plus has been known to take its case to federal courts in many instances. Not far behind in support is the Radio Industry Association of America. The RIAA is probably the most visible entity working to recover lost music sales due to online piracy.

Both the MPAA and RIAA have a just purpose as piracy in any from is illegal. Common sense dictates that piracy leads to higher prices for music and films. However, the efforts of these two groups do little for ensuring consumers the right to fair use of intellectual property.

Fair Use Rights

Federal courts were flooded with copyright-related cases shortly after congress passing the DMCA into law. Certain fair use rights are present in the DMCA, though they are generally vague regarding personal rights to legally purchased copyrighted materials. Several judges have sided with consumers in a variety of cases, but the RIAA and MPAA are still perusing an agenda of limiting personal rights through their current actions and public relation statements.

For example, examine the earlier presented idea of transferring music from a CD to a MP3 player. Most people with any grip on sanity would assume this proceess to be legal given the CD was legally purchased. Sadly, many corporations' interpretation of the DMCA would regard this practice as being illegal, even though the user is only interested in listening the music that he/she acquired legally.

Certain companies took it upon themselves to restrict fair use rights through the introduction of digital copyright mechanisms. The first copy protected compact discs provide an excellent example of the DMCA in action. An underground hacker found that placing a simple mark upon the disc would disable the protection scheme, thus allowing for the direct copying of the music to compressed sound formats for backup or archived playback. The DMCA indicates that this action is highly illegal, thus violating personal fair use rights.

A similar situation is present with DVD videos encoded with CSS encryption. According to the DMCA, the CSS copyright protection scheme can not be legally decrypted, even for personal use backups or media conversion purposes. Those hoping to store of a compressed copy of their favorite movie on a hard-drive for instant playback are in violation of the copyright act.

The Balance Act

A compromise that hopes to protect fair use rights for legally purchased digital works is available within the text of the Balance Act. The act lays out a framework of amendments to current copyright laws to protect a consumer's right to archive or transfer copyrighted materials for personal purposes. To limit software piracy, a digital work is strictly defined as being "any literary work (except a computer program), sound recording, musical work, dramatic work, or motion picture or other audiovisual work, in whole or in part in a digital or other nonanalog format."

To overcome the prospect of the copy protection routines, the Balance Act provides a set of standards for the circumvention of copyright mechanisms for noninfringing usage. In addition, devices designed to bypass copyright protection will be excluded from prosecution or legal action. In accordance, applications like those based upon DeCSS will be legal for use within the United States.

Final Thoughts

In all honesty, little has been done to cease or limit readily accessible piracy methods. The most visible example is analog piracy. Anyone can toss a cassette in their stereo and record directly from a radio station. The same concept even applies to television stations like MTV and BET. Is it not hypocritical to restrict fair use digital copying while illegal analog piracy is so blatantly exploitable by anyone with a cheap radio?