There are two key elements to the DMCA — anticircumvention rules (Sec. 1201) and rules protecting Internet Service Providers (ISPs), in Sec. 512. Traditional copyright law generally says that when a person uses a copyrighted work without permission it is infringement. To protect against infringement in the digital world, many copyright holders have used copy-protection technology as a way to further prevent infringement of their works. Although the concept of infringement does not change in the digital world, some copyright holders did not believe that an infringement cause of action was sufficient to protect their rights, so they extended copyright law a step further. The anti-circumvention provision of the DMCA makes it illegal for a person to get around or break the technological measures used by a copyright holder to protect access to her copyrighted work. The key to anti-circumvention copyright is to the copyrighted work.
The concept of liability that a holder copyright has is a tricky one, but it generally means that all those people that had a hand in production or distribution of the thing that did the harm or that infringed can be held responsible. The typical context in which we find contributory liability is in manufacturing defect cases, where all parties involved with that defective product could, in theory, be held responsible for the ultimate damage caused by the product. In copyright infringement, this can also be the case. Obviously, the threat liability harms the economy and those in the technology world whose services rely on moving information much of which is copyrighted. The aim of the ISP Safe Harbor provision of Section 512 is to prevent the undue harm of copyright infringement liability to an ISP, through notification. Section 512 generally states that an ISP cannot be held liable if, after a copyright owner notifies the ISP that an infringer is providing the copyright owner’s content through the ISP’s service without permission, the ISP removes the infringing material from its service.
