• Latest
    • AI
    • Careers
    • Diversity
    • Future of IP
    • Law firm news
    • Standard-essential patents
    • Trade secrets
    • Unified Patent Court
  • Patents
  • Trademarks
  • Copyright
  • Jurisdiction reports
  • Rankings
    • About Rankings
    • Practice Area Rankings
    • Diversity & Inclusion Top 100 2025
    • Leaders 2025
    • Company Directory
  • WIPR Insights
    • Magazines
    • Whitepapers
    • Webinars
  • Events
    • Conferences
    • Conference Videos
  • About
  • Contact
  • Newsletter
  • Login
  • Subscribe
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Newsletter
  • Login


Subscribe
  • Home
  • Copyright
  • US Court to decide if DCMA provision violates First Amendment
shutterstock_1126055060_zimmytws
2 July 2019Copyright

US Court to decide if DCMA provision violates First Amendment

A US court is to decide whether the “anti-circumvention” provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ( DMCA) violates the First Amendment.

Already registered?

Login to your account


If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.

For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Copyright
Safe harbour system ‘unbalanced’, says US Copyright Office
22 May 2020   The US Copyright Office has concluded that the safe harbour provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is “out of sync” with Congress’ intent.
Copyright
EFF warns of ‘ill-considered’ copyright provisions
24 October 2018   Articles 11 and 13 of the recently-passed copyright directive are “ill-considered and should not be EU law”, according to a letter shared by the Electronic Frontier Foundation yesterday.


Editor's picks

LVMH: ‘External counsel must simplify, not complicate’
Trademarks
LVMH: ‘External counsel must simplify, not complicate’
17 November 2025

Editor's picks

Trademarks
LVMH: ‘External counsel must simplify, not complicate’
17 November 2025
AI
Trademark exposure: Getty ruling signals new risks for AI developers
7 November 2025
Patents
New AIPLA president calls for greater certainty in US patent law
6 November 2025
Patents
Squires plays rare reexamination of Pokémon gaming patent
5 November 2025
Patents
Squires: ‘Inherited patent backlog was an absolute dumpster fire’
1 November 2025
Patents
AI industry exceptions could muddy IP protection, says House counsel
31 October 2025

More articles

Masimo bags $634m win over Apple—with latest watch under scrutiny
How we secured $191m damages for an NPE against Samsung
LVMH: ‘External counsel must simplify, not complicate’
Freshfields hires new global co-head of AI
Birkenstock lands key win over sandal designs—defying German ruling
German court rules against OpenAI in copyright first
Oracle counsel warns: Beware the ‘Streisand effect’ in disputes
Stanley cup maker accuses US retailer of ‘parasitic copying’

  • Home
  • News
  • Directory
  • About us
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Terms of Subscription

WIPR
Newton Media Ltd
Kingfisher House
21-23 Elmfield Road
BR1 1LT
United Kingdom

  • Twitter
  • Linkedin