After reading though a lot of stuff they they had linked to on that page, it ony deals with exceptions to a law against "circumvention of technological measures"
Q: Okay, Bobak, what does that mean?
A: This is complex as all hell, so bare with me:
First of all, there is more than one law designed to prohibit IP theft. In fact there are dozens and dozens.
The law they are making exceptions to deals with the "circumvention of technological measures". These are laws that make it illegal to use one medium to view material that was intended for another, illustrated thus: If you have a VHS tape, it's very easy to copy it or move the contents since it has very little protection (compared to the encryption, etc of video game), the law in question prevents you from moving it without breaking the law (
which is a separate law from that of illegally copying protected work; it's just an extra layer of protection).
This exemption removes the punishment for actually moving a copyrighted item from one format to the other. However, what it does not affect is the whether or not the person moving the copyrighted item
has permission to do so.
The reason they did this is because they feared this extra rule would intefere with scholarship and other fair uses of public copyright. They noted that, since video games already have "“original-only” access controls to ensure that unauthorized
copies of their works may not be disseminated and displace the market for legitimate copies" (see text below), the law in question was at risk of making things unduly hard on the libraries and such that have public use needs.
This exception was meant to make sure that libraries don't break the law by transfering documents they need to archive.
However, one thing to keep in mind is: If you make the copyright laws too light, it actually makes producers of games MORE likely to keep them completely off the market (since they'll be afraid they'll get stolen and there will be nothing they can do). The group that drafted this exception claims to have taken that into account (more on that in the analysis section below the text below)
A lot of this is explained in the 198 page report by the Copyright office in regards to this change. (see pages 59-63, though I've selected the best "overall summary" text reproduced below)
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/registers-recommendation.pdf
The key text from that page:
Because many providers of software and video games have elected to use “original-only” access controls to ensure that unauthorized copies of their works may not be disseminated and displace the market for legitimate copies, care must be taken, in fashioning any exemption, to limit the scope of the exemption so that it does not serve as a disincentive to continue to make such works available. Restricting the exemption to software and videogames that are (1) protected by such access controls and (2) in obsolete formats, serves this end while permitting noninfringing uses in the cases where users have no other (or, at best, very limited) options if they wish to gain access to the works. The restriction to obsolete formats also helps ensure that use of the exemption will likely be made only or at least largely by some libraries and archives, since consumers are less likely than libraries and archives to have an interest in using and copying out-of-date software and video games.
ANALYSIS
That last sentence is a killer for anyone thinking that this helps ROM users. The intent of this entire exception was to protect "libraries and archives" (read that as: gov't and academic institutions). If you try and cop out using this law you would get nailed for not falling into that intended class. The rocument fleshes out that concept in this passage (and you will quickly see how this does not apply to ROMers:
Even for works that exist in both analog and digital formats, the archivist has a legitimate interest in preserving all editions, including the electronic editions, for posterity. The archivist confronted with access controls that prevent preservation of digital works must either circumvent those access controls or refrain from making a usable copy of the digital work. The latter option obviously does not serve the interests that the second statutory factor is intended to advance.
So that's why this has absolutely no effect on the casual ROM user.
------------
Finally, here is the exception that this thread originally was talking about. After reading the above, it will fit a lot better in context.
On October 28, 2003, the Librarian of Congress, on the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, announced the classes of works subject to the exemption from the prohibition against circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works. The four classes of works exempted are:
[. . . ]
(3) Computer programs and video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and which require the original media or hardware as a condition of access. A format shall be considered obsolete if the machine or system necessary to render perceptible a work stored in that format is no longer manufactured or is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace.
---------
Whew... now if you'll all excuse me I have a number of parties to to go attend
