RE: [dvd-discuss] Bunner wins DeCSS trade secret appeal

["Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

Anyone here...probably not...as for the court

<quote>
If the source code were "compiled" to create object code, we would agree 
that the resulting composition of zeroes and ones would not convey ideas. 
(See
generally Junger v. Daley, supra, 209 F.3d at pp. 482-483.) That the 
source code is capable of such compilation, however, does not destroy the 
expressive nature of the source code itself.
</quote>

The court has drawn a line in the sand....a few inches from a cliff...but 
a line in the sand nevertheless!




"Ballowe, Charles" <CBallowe@usg.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
11/05/01 10:29 AM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     "'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
        cc: 
        Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] Bunner wins DeCSS trade secret appeal




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah silva [mailto:nsilva@atari-source.com]
> Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Bunner wins DeCSS trade secret appeal
> 
> my point here is...
> if I am a photographer, I take photos for a living. take two 
> scenareos:
> a.)
> I take photos with my nice nikon 35MM SLR camera.
> I take them to the photo shop to get them processed and printed.
> I sell the prints to people.  (I can get lots of prints from one
> negative).
> 
> b.)
> I take my photos with my Fuji Digital Camera.
> I take them to my PC and make prints on my high quality dye 
> sublimation
> photo printer.
> I sell the prints to people.
> 
> Some people like to use the images on their computer for desktop
> backgrounds, etc. so...
> c.)
> I take my photos with my Fuji Digital Camera.
> I take them to my PC and make prints on my high quality dye 
> sublimation
> photo printer.
> I burn CDs with the images on them, and sell them to people.
> 
> 
> Now...
> should the situations have different legal statuses?  Why and why not?
> In my view.. in all three cases, the photographer is creating original
> work and selling it.  First sale can and does occure in every 
> case.  The
> photos are protected by copyright in every case.  this is how 
> it should
> be.  If the laws aren't in line now, they should be, to 
> protect the spirit
> of copyright.. does anyone disagree? 
> 
It's already been established that programs can be copyright. Even if
the digital images on CD are considered programs, you can still hold
the copyright on them. If you take them and encode them using some weak
encryption hoping people will only view the images with your software
and somebody finds a mechanism to bypass that, should they not have 
the right to view your images with other software? 

I don't think anybody here (unless I'm wrong) would argue that your
images (or DVDs) would lose copyright just because they might have 
become a program. 

-Charles Ballowe