Re: [dvd-discuss] Hackers = terrorists, an analysis

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

The author of the salon article had a mailto at  the bottom of the 
article....I sent him a paragraph slightly edited from my last paragraph. 
Feel Free to send him your comments, as if you needed any urging :-)




"John Zulauf" <johnzu@ia.nsc.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
09/26/01 02:44 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] Hackers = terrorists, an analysis




Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org wrote:
> 
> Rather chilling...If there are striking parallels then it indicates
> perhaps we, (society, politicians, legal system) are wasting too much 
time
> on "intellectual property" and would be better suited spending energies
> elsewhere.
> 
> That article was rather offensive, although I doubt the author intended 
it
> to be - comparing if not equating the death of individuals and 
destruction
> of personal property to infringment of intellectual property. THere is a
> considerable difference between the two. I haven't heard of anybody
> willing to die to preserve intellectual property from infringment. Maybe
> our laws should rediscover that fact that I'm certain was well 
understood
> 100yrs ago.

it is past time that we called the MPAA, RIAA, et. al. the hyperbole
they use.  Given the real loss of life on 9/11, it is offensive and
insensitive in the extreme.  I think casual hyperbole probably tends to
grow in the absence of real war and conflict.  I takes a cold dose of
reality to expose the hyperbole for the sham it is, and we need to raise
the cry (in English MP style) of "shame, shame" whenever we hear it.

.002