The Moscow-based company is accused of writing software to circumvent the anti-copying security in Adobe’s e-book software in breach of the DMCA. Its lawyers tried to argue that the 1998 law is too vague because it does not clearly spell out the conduct that it prohibits.
However, Judge Whyte wrote:
“The language is not difficult to decipher and is all encompassing: it includes any tool, no matter its form, that is primarily designed or produced to circumvent technological protection.”
Whyte agreed with prosecutors that the DMCA does not distinguish between tools used to infringe copyrights and those that enable constitutionally protected fair uses, but that in doing so it is not too restrictive under the Constitution’s protection of free speech.