The Library of Congress approved several specific three-year exemptions to the DMCA's prohibition on breaking DRM (digital restrictions management).

However, since the exemptions do not allow distributing the means to actually do so, they may in some cases be impossible to take advantage of.

The campaigns for these exemptions are a harmful distraction which saps energy from what we really need: to repeal what the DMCA says about DRM. It should be a crime to make systems with DRM.

The article uses the ill-advised term "digital locks" to refer to digital restrictions mechanisms. See the explanation of why that term is a bad analogy, and please join me in not using it.