[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: Another Poster Child for DeCSS?
- To: <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: Another Poster Child for DeCSS?
- From: "Richard Hartman" <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:38:25 -0700
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Thread-index: AcL+tRLVPTynvOzDSMy+Ex/cpzm2iQD92XyA
- Thread-topic: [dvd-discuss] Re: Another Poster Child for DeCSS?
Why would the purchaser have to go to court to show
that the claim is invalid. Could not the purchaser
make his own counter-claim and the Schroedinger's cat
nature of the law would protect him unless the publisher
tried to pursue it in court -- at which point the publisher
is as likely to be on the wrong side of the quantum
state collapse as the purchaser is . . .
-Richard M. Hartman
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Zulauf [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 9:26 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Re: Another Poster Child for DeCSS?
> email@example.com wrote:
> > Shrinkwrap?....and how can a legal contract be made
> involving illegal acts.
> > Works in the PD are everyones. DRM removes this work from
> those purchasing it
> > now and in resale. As PD "I" own the work. The have
> reformated it and I have
> > paid for that. They deserve nothing more. Now I attempt to
> reclaim my work and
> > cannot. This is fraud. Although only a tortured
> sado-masochistic contracts
> > expert might revel in the nuances here regarding "OH...they
> signed away their
> > rights...rights which can never be signed away" PD is PUBLIC DOMAIN.
> I spoke to one our company lawyers. What he said was "lawyers get to
> lie" -- if they can find an *arguement* (valid or not) to defend their
> position, they can assert any rights they want. The *purchaser* then
> would have to show in court that the claims are invalid.
> But, since it
> takes a court to determine the validity of the claim, the lawyer can
> state almost anything, because until the court rules, the law is just
> "Schroedinger's cat" -- and any claim about it's quantum state is
> equally valid.
> My follow-up was what about areas that have been litigated.
> The seller
> can always claim that they *could* possibly win (overturning precedent
> is possible) and thus the shrink-wrap claims go back in the box with
> Schroedinger's cat.