RE: [dvd-discuss] apeals court ruling

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

SO how does this differ from 

C:\makefile_DeCSS

<makefile runs>

C:\decss JackValentiIsAnIdiot.DVD

From:           	Richard Hartman <hartman@onetouch.com>
To:             	"'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Subject:        	RE: [dvd-discuss] apeals court ruling 
Date sent:      	Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:49:02 -0800
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Peter D. Junger [mailto:junger@samsara.law.cwru.edu]
> ...
> > On the other hand, if worse comes to worse and this is the end
> > of the road for the Remierdes case---which I doubt---the decision
> > only applies to the defendant in Remierdes.  Since it seems to turn
> > on the ``fact'' that one can run DeCSS by clicking on an icon, any
> > case where there is a version of the code that requires one to use
> > the command line should be clearly distinguishable.  And there are
> > going to be lots of distinctions that may be more significant than
> > that one.
> > 
> 
> So this only happened because DeCSS was distributed as
> a compiled program -- if it was distributed solely as
> source code (requiring a human to take a complex series
> of actions before producing anything that a "single click"
> could active) we would still be ok?
> 
> 
> -- 
> -Richard M. Hartman
> hartman@onetouch.com
> 
> 186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!>