Things change. And the cries of a small, unimportant industry — I mean the whole of the "content providers" side — who of course refuse to admit there are any more content providers — I really enjoy my own stuff much more than anything Disney has made since 1935. I stand equal to them, by the way. New Yorkers for Fair Use, one of our favorite tropes is: "Nonsense! We're not consumers; we're owners and we're makers." And here is the bottom line:

The natural point which will defend us against the dreadful assault on private property which is all the anticircumvention clauses of the DMCA, is to draw a natural line. Inside your house, you've got a copy of something, if you've lawfully obtained it — Oh, by the way, we're not copyright extremists. I myself am a big supporter of the GPL, which is a somewhat strict copyright license, and I consider it actually one of the main foundations of the defense of free software.

If you don't draw the line, if you seek for exemptions, you'll have to make hundreds of exemptions — and even if you enforce them — and you could enforce them — the principle would remain: you don't have control over your machine. You'd have to get lobbyists, or a grassroots organization to come to Washington, appear before you every three years, and beg, on bended knee, for particular exemptions.

You don't have to do that. You are allowed to turn to Congress and say, we've seen the parade of horribles. And not just one parade. All of the people here, arguing for exemptions — the principle is the same: These people can't reach into your house and tell you what to do! It's absurd!

It is absurd, and until every American realizes what is at stake and chooses to d osomething about it, we will be at the mercy of the copyright industry, which has only itw own best interests at heart.