Talk:WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I've moved this back to it's actual title. Jamesday 22:17, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

And now I've completed the edits which explain why using just one part of this act for the whole act didn't make sense. Jamesday 01:06, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that this thing states 'effective technological measure', yet the word "effective" means 'able to accomplish a purpose', so that the very fact that something can be circumvented means it isn't effective...? [IANAL]

An alternative interpretation of the term 'effective', and one that seems to have been followed by the courts, is more like 'having the effect of'. Thus the word has been interpreted as expanding, rather than limiting applicability. (Measures that weren't even designed for copy protection might have the effect of making copying more difficult.) But it is certainly ambiguous on its face. --Speight (talk) 03:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please make a revision noting that while the WIPO act was part of the DMCA, the WIPO treaty came 2 years earlier and was actually the cause of the DMCA. This article's opening appears to insinuate that WIPO is child of the DMCA.

-Emerson (I don't have a wikipedia account) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.165.40.159 (talk) 00:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on WIPO Copyright and Performances and Phonograms Treaties Implementation Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060215220604/http://www.eff.org:80/IP/DMCA/unintended_consequences.php to http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/unintended_consequences.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]