Re: [dvd-discuss] Ramblings on DVDCCA appeal from M.Rolenz

["Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

Except the understanding of the technology and the fact that nothing has 
changed in nearly 100 yrs. Ironically,   the "digital is different" mantra 
blinds the judges to the fact that to the USSC justices in 1917, the 
motion picture was something new, different and as mystifying as the 
computer is today. Yet despite all that they abstracted the relevant parts 
and based their decision upon sound principles.




"D. C. Sessions" <dcs@lumbercartel.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@lweb.law.harvard.edu
12/26/01 02:24 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     dvd-discuss@lweb.law.harvard.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] Ramblings on DVDCCA appeal from M.Rolenz


On Saturday 22 December 2001 15:54, James S. Tyre wrote:
# >2. Unlicensed players. They make much about unlicensed players yet the
# >supreme court has dealt this this argument before in 1917 (universal 
films?).

Perhaps someone could correct me on this, but didn't the USSC rule
that the attempt to tie "licensed players" to copyrighted material
constituted copyright abuse?

If so, I would think that all the pieces are in place to hang the DVDCCA
by their own sworn pleadings -- no remaining issues of fact to determine,
just questions of settled law.

-- 
| I'm old enough that I don't have to pretend to be grown up.|
+----------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+