Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle

Re:Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle by TheDong on Monday February 02, 2026 @12:27AM (#46852749)

Once it hits 70 years from the lifetime of the author (so probably another 80 or 90 years from now) and is in public domain, that might change things since there will no longer be copyright being protected.

In terms of copyright terms, this software is still pretty young, not even halfway to public domain. It's disrespectful to call it "very old".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle by direwolf20 on Monday February 02, 2026 @04:01AM (#46853893)

Defeating a copy protection measure is illegal, even if the copy protection measure is not copyrighted.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle by TheDong on Monday February 02, 2026 @12:28PM (#46858632)

I'm not talking about the copy protection, but the software being protected.

Surely if the work being protected isn't copyrighted, there's nothing to circumvent in terms of the DMCA?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle by direwolf20 on Monday February 02, 2026 @02:39PM (#46860262)

A non–copyrighted work can still have a copy protection measure

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Defeating a 40-year-old copy protection dongle by TheDong on Monday February 02, 2026 @11:26PM (#46866485)

But would the DMCA ("Copyright Act") still apply when there's no copyright?

Here, let's read together: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

> No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title

> protected under this title

A work not protected under title 17, copyright, is thus not covered.

[ Parent | on HN ]