I'd like to publically apologize to Alan for the disconnect between him and us as well as the disruption to the project as there was no ill will intended and we were already working on a resolution with him before this went public.' Since the time I started working on the story he's also made another post stating that in fact the reverse engineering in question does appear to be legal under the DMCA. Marlin today posted an update to the situation saying 'The DMCA removal request and the project reinstatement was sent to Google yesterday 5/4.

While the DMCA does address reverse engineering of certain code, which has been most famously (or infamously) demonstrated by the legal history of the DeCSS code used to circumvent the CSS encryption found on most commercial DVDs, the Takedown Notice specifically claims that code owned by CoreCodec was the issue, and not the reverse engineering process itself as his statement seemed to suggest. This raises some questions about the validity of the Takedown Notice. Marlin stated that 'this is not about copyright (even thought the DMCA deals with that), this is mostly about reverse engineering without permission under the DMCA.' In a discussion of the issue on the CoreCodec forum Mr. What makes this particular case noteworthy is the that the notice specifically states 'The Site hosts and/or contains one or more links to CoreAVC, which contains CoreCodec's copyrighted Software.' However, comments posted over the weekend by CoreCodec founder Dan Marlin appear to cast some doubt, or at least confusion, over the infringement claim. They've most famously been used to have copyrighted video removed from sites like YouTube, although they're routinely issued for everything from printed works to audio files. A DMCA Takedown Notice is the official mechanism put in place by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) for copyright owners to deal with infringement issues without making hosting companies liable for everything published on their servers.

Corecodec download