October 2015

[Commentary] What does 3D printing have to do with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? In Nov 2014, Public Knowledge petitioned the Copyright Office for a number of exemptions to the prohibition against circumventing technological protection measures (i.e. “digital locks”) protecting copyrighted works under Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Fortunately, the Library of Congress, at the recommendation of the Copyright Office, granted our request, permitting users to use replacement materials that are not authorized by the printer’s manufacturer without running afoul of copyright law. However, that we even needed to seek permission for something so simple and beyond the purpose of copyright law highlights why Public Knowledge supports efforts to reform Section 1201 and end the absurdity of needing exemptions like this one. Nevertheless, this is a win for competition, tinkerers, and consumers, at least in principle. Unfortunately, the win comes with significant caveats.

A few Democratic Senators plan to push a bill during the week of Nov 2 to repeal a portion of the budget agreement that would allow the government to make robocalls to cellphones in order to collect outstanding debt. Sen Ed Markey (D-MA), who authored the telephone consumer protection laws in the 1990s, plans to introduce the legislation Nov 2. A number of Democratic lawmakers called out the provision after expressing surprise that it made its way into the bipartisan budget framework. "This deal comes with a price: More unwanted calls and texts to Americans," Sen Markey said on the floor on Oct 29, after applauding the broader deal.

The small provision was not enough to prevent Democratic critics from voting to advance the bill. Sen Claire McCaskill (D-MO), who will also co-sponsor the bill, has called the provision a "stupid idea" but said it doesn't warrant "jettisoning" the broader compromise. Similarly, Sen Markey's touted the broader agreement to extend the debt limit and relieve budget caps. Sen Markey's office said "a number" of other Sens are also expected to sign onto the the bill. The robocall provision would exempt the government and those collecting debt on its behalf from some telephone consumer protection rules, if the calls are made "solely to collect a debt owed to or guaranteed by the United States." Nearly all automated or prerecorded calls to cellphones are currently barred.

A federal jury in Oklahoma has awarded $6.31 million to a group of cable TV customers after it found that Cox Communications broke federal antitrust law. Cox unfairly forced customers to rent its set-top box as a condition of receiving premium cable service, the jury ruled. Refusing the box meant being unable to access Cox's interactive channel guide and on-demand video, according to the original complaint. Not only did tying premium service to set-top boxes limit features for subscribers who wanted to use third-party boxes, but Cox unfairly profited from customers who rented its own set-top box (and may have been forced into the decision against their will), according to the class action. A congressional probe in 2015 found that consumers pay more than $230 a year renting set-top boxes from their cable companies.

"Even if Cox purchases set-top boxes for only $200, Cox's monthly rental fee of at least $6.99 in its Oklahoma City market will surpass $200 in less than two years and five months," the complaint read, "leaving Cox with a minimum of 2.5 years of pure profits and consumers with a substantial loss." Cox argued that it didn't force customers into doing anything they didn't want to do, noting that Dish and DirecTV are both available in the region. It also pointed to other set-top boxes such as TiVo that could provide an alternative to the Cox equipment. But the jury ultimately decided in the subscribers' favor. Despite the ruling, Cox officials are "gratified that the jury recognized most of the damages plaintiffs were seeking were unwarranted." The company is trying to get the verdict overturned.