Re: [dvd-discuss] [openlaw] Governmenttakesmoreextremeli

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

WHich raises the question "if the patents on the CD are expiring, 
will everything needed to produce a CD or a CD player be in the 
public domain? What of the patents on the DVD? SInce nobody 
needs DeCSS to rip something off a DVD, could part of the issue 
be that the DVDCCA wants to keep the DVD format in perpetuity? 
Control of the content and the media as they had control of the 
theatre and studios in the 40s and all the way back to the Universal 
Film case of 1917.

If the Sonny Bono CTEA is declared null at least WRT to 
retroactive copyright, then beginning very soon the issue of access 
to the public domain becomes a VERY real one and not 
hypothetical as the government and the courts believe. One cannot 
have a public domain unless one has access to it exclusive of the 
media the works are on.





> D. C. Sessions wrote:
> 
> >On Friday 11 January 2002 15:05, you wrote:
> ># On 01/11/02 at 13:15, 'twas brillig and Michael A Rolenz scrobe:
> ># > 
> ># > One tantalizing question is the fact that the UMP CDs do not adhere to the 
> ># > standards created almost 20yrs ago. IN that sense they are deliberatly 
> ># > defective. I don't think any legal scholars have ever addressed what sort 
> ># > of liability a company incurs by deliberatly creating defective goods for 
> ># > the market place. To my way of thinking that constitutes bad faith and 
> ># > should set them up for consequential damages if not punitive ones.
> ># 
> ># 	Apparently Philips is making similar noises, according to a /.
> ># story (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/11/1816258 which cites
> ># http://www.tecchannel.de/news/20020110/thema20020110-6415.html).
> ># Philips seems to say that copy protection violates the CD standard and
> ># therefore "copy-protected" discs should not bear the CD logo.
> ># Unfortunately the source article is in German so it's a little
> ># difficult for me to be sure of how strongly Philips feels about this;
> ># IIRC their CD/DA patents are on their last legs so it's possible they
> ># don't want to bother forcing the record companies to comply with the
> ># license.
> >
> >The patent may be expiring, but the trademark is certainly still solid.
> >Also, whether we have the patent or not we certainly *did* create
> >the CD standard, so the Company's opinions on the matter should
> >carry weight with prosecutors and courts.
> >
> Especially in this new "consent==authorization" world.
> 
> mickeym
> 
> 


------- End of forwarded message -------