Re: [dvd-discuss] indictment

[Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org]

" master cryptanalyst Immanuel Kant 
would have happily DeCSSed und dang an such."

Your'e misquoting Kant. I think he said "damn, it sucks"           :-)




John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
08/29/01 10:22 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] indictment


The purchaser in San Jose was Adobe, which is described in
the FBI's affidavit. This is how the US Attorney in San Jose
got the case rather than say the USA in the jurisdiction of 
Issaquah, Washington, where RegNow is based, or the
USA in Chicago where we have learned Elmcomsoft's
server was allegedly located.

Whether Adobe was advised by the FBI or the US Attorney's
office to make this purchase in order to kick in the majesty of
the DMCA remains to be disclosed. It could have been done
upon the advice of Adobe's own counsel or its security
official (who is cited in the FBI affidavit) or perhaps some
other party in the DMCA wars.

The key in Sklyarov is its commercial aspects, in conrast to
to the non-commercial of DVDCCA in California, 2600 in 
New York, the Connecticut case and Felton et al.

It is the commercial aspect which kicks in those amazing
prospective penalties. And also reveals the essential
purpose of DMCA -- not its interference with educational
research but its prohibition agains circumvention of profits.

If Sklyarov had not come along then it would have been
somebody else to take the edge off the civil suits which were
only prolegomena as the master cryptanalyst Immanuel Kant 
would have happily DeCSSed und dang an such.

What amazes is the theological arguments made by the
copyright evangelists and the inquistorial practices and
punishments they advance against infidels.