RE: [dvd-discuss] FW: SJ MercuryNews, Ruling a blow for DVD indus try (11-02-2001) (Emailing: dvdsuit02.htm)

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

"All Gaul is divided into four parts....." The MPAA, The RIAA, DVDCCA, and 
the SDMI.




Richard Hartman <hartman@onetouch.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
11/05/01 04:27 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     "'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
        cc: 
        Subject:        RE: [dvd-discuss] FW: SJ MercuryNews, Ruling a blow for DVD indus try 
(11-02-2001) (Emailing: dvdsuit02.htm)




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
...
> 
> Yes. I think that's a true danger. What is particulary 
> gauling 

OhMiGod!  The DVDCCA is _FRENCH_ ?!?!?  No wonder they hold
the rest of us in so much contempt! 

:-)

>about the 
> DVDCCA is their argument that "they had it therefore they 
> stole it!" and 
> that the lower court didn't say.....give me proof...show me evidence 
> before putting ANY injunction. If the DVDCCA can't provide 
> EVIDENCE, the 
> court should not even bother listening to them....

D'accord.  Even if proof is a matter for the trial, there
should be at least enough evidence that theft occurred to
call the question.  I believe that was lacking in this case.

>although I 
> do realize 
> that shrinkwrap licenses did play a part in the argument.
> 

... and shrinkwrap licences have been invalidated just about
every time they come before the court.  It shouldn't have played
any part in the argument!


-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!