Re: [dvd-discuss] Skylarov indicted for trafficing and conspiracy.

["Chris Moseng" <underwhelm_org(at)hotmail.com>]

It's another instance of how lubed-up the DMCA is.

Of course, there is a slight semantic difference betwee 'infringement' and 
'violation.' It is no longer necessary to infringe on a copyright to violate 
copyright law.


>From: Sham Gardner <mail@risctaker.inka.de>
>Reply-To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
>Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Skylarov indicted for trafficing and conspiracy.
>Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:05:18 +0200
>
>On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 07:08:38AM -0700, John Young wrote:
> > This is from the US Attorney's Office press release yesterday:
> >
> >   http://cryptome.org/dmitry-doj-hit.htm
> >
> > -----
> >
> > The United States Attorney's Office for the Northern District of
> > California announced that Elcom Ltd. (also known as Elcomsoft
> > Co. Ltd.) and Dmitry Sklyarov, 27, both of Moscow, Russia, were
> > indicted today by a federal grand jury in San Jose, California on
> > five counts of copyright violations.
>
>Way back when he imposed the preliminary injunction didn't Kaplan reject 
>the
>fair use defence with the claim that it was a defence against copyright
>infringement, but the defendants weren't charged with copyright 
>infringment,
>but DMCA violation. This would seem to invalidate that claim. Or is the
>US Attorney's office being sloppy?
>
>--
>http://sites.inka.de/risctaker/DeCSS/
>
>Knowledge is power - beware those who seek to hoard it.


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp