OT Garage Doors Raise DMCA Questions
By Katie Dean / Also by this reporter Page 1 of 1
02:00 AM Sep. 17, 2003 PT
Manufacturers of a seemingly innocuous product -- a garage door opener -- are embroiled in a battle that tests the limits of a controversial copyright law.
Skylink Technologies manufactures a universal garage door opener that can be used to open and shut any type of garage door. Its competitor, the Chamberlain Group, claims that Skylink violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA, by selling such a product.
Special Advertising Section
Become one of 64.
Story Tools
See also
Court Hears DVD Copying Dispute
Online Anonymity Comes Under Fire
Baby DMCAs Punish Copy Crimes
Lexmark: New Fuel for DMCA Foes
Summit: DMCA Blocks Tech Progress
Read more Technology news
Today's Top 5 Stories
Clark's Run: Net Made Him Do It
Senator Takes a Swing at RIAA
The Revolution Will Be Televised
Protesters Mourn Tech-Job Drain
Garage Doors Raise DMCA Questions
Chamberlain alleges Skylink's handheld portable transmitter can activate Chamberlain's garage door openers and, in doing so, unlawfully bypasses a technology-protection measure built into the device's software.
Skylink disagrees, and recently filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois for summary judgment, whereby a judge decides the case instead of going to trial.
"When Chamberlain sells (its) garage door openers, there is no restriction prohibiting the consumer from operating the garage door with a third-party transmitter," said David Djavaherian, an attorney for Skylink. "For a violation to occur under the DMCA, access to the copyright work must be unauthorized."
Neither representatives of Chamberlain nor its lawyers returned repeated calls for comment.
The case has been closely monitored by digital rights groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which has argued that the DMCA is being abused by companies that want to stifle their competitors. The DMCA, the groups contend, also impedes innovation.
Congress initially passed the DMCA to address copyright issues in the digital age. Under the law, it is illegal to circumvent a technology that controls access to copyright works, and any tools used to circumvent that technology also are forbidden.
Chamberlain uses special software, called rolling code, in its garage door openers. It argues that this is copyright code. The garage door opener consists of a handheld portable transmitter and a garage door opening device, which is attached to the garage ceiling. Since Skylink's handheld portable transmitters also can make Chamberlain's garage door openers operate by activating Chamberlain's code, Chamberlain claims Skylink is violating the DMCA.
Skylink contends that consumers should be able to open their garage doors any way they please, and states in the motion that "Chamberlain has never imposed any limitations on homeowners who purchase its rolling code (garage door openers) -- either in manuals, packaging, instructions or elsewhere -- regarding which type of replacement or additional transmitter they may or may not use to access the (openers)."
"Because there is no unauthorized access to the software used in Chamberlain's garage door openers, there can be no DMCA violation," Djavaherian said.
Djavaherian also said there were several other reasons the judge should rule in Skylink's favor, namely, that Skylink's transmitters cause the internal computer processes of Chamberlain's product to operate, and this process should not be considered access to a copyright work.
He added that Skylink's product falls within a DMCA provision that permits interoperability.
In December 2002, Chamberlain filed a motion for summary judgment that was denied by Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer in August. In her ruling, Pallmeyer suggested that Skylink, rather than Chamberlain, might have a better chance of pursuing summary judgment in the matter.
The case illustrates the unintended consequences of the DMCA, critics say.
"Congress didn't intend that the DMCA should prevent me from entering my own garage," said Gwen Hinze, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "The Chamberlain garage door opener company doesn't have the right to dictate what brand of clicker I must buy to open my garage, even if they own the copyright on the software used to control the garage opener."
"By enacting the DMCA, Congress meant to protect copyright, not to prevent companies from developing devices that can interoperate with copyright software," Hinze said.
Other companies are fighting similar DMCA-related battles. Lexmark International sued Static Control Components, alleging that the aftermarket toner cartridge company illegally remanufactures cartridges to make them compatible with Lexmark printers. Static Control is countersuing Lexmark for unfair trade practices.
Joe Kraus, co-founder of DigitalConsumer.org, said the Lexmark and Skylink cases demonstrate how the DMCA is being misused by businesses.
"A law that was really intended to stop people from renting a DVD at Blockbuster and making a personal copy is instead being used by incumbents to stop innovations in fields as mundane as garage door openers and printers," he said. "If Chamberlain or Lexmark are successful, it's very worrisome for the future of innovation."
