<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Drm on Hashbang.ca</title>
		<link>https://hashbang.ca/tag/drm</link>
		<description>Recent content in Drm on Hashbang.ca</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en-us</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 19:49:00 -0400</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://hashbang.ca/tag/drm/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>Applying fair dealing exceptions to TPMs</title>
				<link>https://hashbang.ca/post/applying-fair-dealing-exceptions-to-tpms</link>
				<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 19:49:00 -0400</pubDate>
				<guid>https://hashbang.ca/post/applying-fair-dealing-exceptions-to-tpms/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;James Gannon &lt;a href=&#34;http://jamesgannon.ca/2011/11/02/5-steps-to-understanding-bill-c-11-and-digital-locks/&#34;&gt;points out&lt;/a&gt; that &amp;ldquo;Critics of the TPM provisions in Bill C-11 often claim to have a &amp;ldquo;balanced&amp;rdquo; solution for TPM protection: to create an exception that allows hacking for legal purposes.&amp;rdquo; That&amp;rsquo;s certainly correct, however, he proceeds to misconstrue what that suggestion actually means.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
