[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Antitrust Liability for DRM vendors
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Antitrust Liability for DRM vendors
- From: microlenz(at)earthlink.net
- Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 18:13:47 -0800
- In-reply-to: <3E418F1A.E34EEB07@ia.nsc.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
On 5 Feb 2003 at 15:24, John Zulauf wrote:
Date sent: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 15:24:26 -0700
From: "John Zulauf" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "DVD Discuss" <email@example.com>
Subject: [dvd-discuss] Antitrust Liability for DRM vendors
Send reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Just read
> that argues that one risks antitrust liability for going along with the
> copyright holders in any arrangement which over steps the bounds of
> traditional copyright.
I'm not certain I buy the Antitrust argument as much as I do the abuse of
copyright. To disseminate works that do not permit fair use is to abuse the
terms of copyright. The proper punishment should be the loss of copyright.
> As several of us are in the tech/silicon industry, this liability should
> probably be considered by our various corporations. I certainly doubt
> being a DVD-CCA licensee indemnifies one from antitrust liability
> (regardless of what Judge Kaplan's old firm opined).
The situation reminds me of a speech Lincoln gave while running for either the
Senate or the Presidency but he spoke using the first names of Stephen Douglas,
Justice Taney (Dred Scott) and possibly James Buchanen and how neither one
claims that they wanted the end (slavery) but only by the actions of all three
could the end occur. He argued that it's hard to believe that they are not
acting in concert given the result.
> IANAL, TWAL (those who are lawyers) care to comment? Something a tech
> company should actually take CYA step regarding?