In response to post #39514525. #39514985, #39515670, #39515755, #39515875, #39516010, #39516150, #39516205, #39516265, #39516385, #39516625, #39516800, #39516940, #39516945, #39517040 are all replies on the same post. @doomy19 Being "The LAW<sup>TM</sup>" doesn't exempt it from being anything other than being illegal. :B It can still be unreasonable, it can still be extreme, and it can still be wrong. Since it seems this discussion is going the "legal" route, I'll say this- I live in the US, where I have the right to an opinion and the freedom of expression, as well as to speak out against laws that aren't just as peaceful protest; so yes, there IS something to disagree with and I have every right to do so. If the law was right just because it was the law, we wouldn't have any more copyright laws in the US other than the Copyright Act of 1976, because it would've never had to be changed because it would be instantaneously right because it was the law- thus, the DMCA would've never existed; being an extension to the Copyright Act of 1976. Obviously that's circular logic and things aren't that black-and-white. The DMCA is an extension of US copyright law, it isn't the legal definition of copyright in the US. A broken one at that- a few months ago (I think in April?) the US Copyright Office asked the public basically "What's wrong with the DMCA?" Several thousands of explanations and complaints were sent within the first hour, mostly about the takedown process and anti-circumvention measures. :B The DMCA is very controversial- with good reason. It's more of a witch hunt than valid due process; all you need is "good faith-" not a jury by court or even evidence at that. Most people who disobey copyright do it not to be jerks, not to be selfish, but because God forbid you draw a character you like that everyone knows who made it to show your appreciation rather than toss wads of cash at its creator. Copyright criminalizes simple, innocent acts of appreciation, and needs some serious repair for it to actually "promote progress of science and the useful arts" rather forbidding doing just that.