RE: [dvd-discuss] 2600 Loses in 2nd Circuit

[John Galt <galt(at)inconnu.isu.edu>]

You know, this reminds me of the old slogan: "Smith & Wesson, the original 
point and click interface".  Since that slogan's been around a while, it 
might have extra provenance when dealing with this issue in a "we told you 
so" manner.  I think the slogan made it on to t-shirts a couple-three 
years ago as well, so an obviously old yet well kept shirt strategically 
placed may do wonders.  This could tie in rather neatly with Scott 
Crosby's riff if one could get the idea across that the click of a mouse 
is no harder than the click of a gun and there has been no decision 
declaring the click of a gun to be functional, therfore your very life is 
less important than the MPAA's copyright according to the courts.  We 
could probably use Bierce's definition of inadmissable as an example


On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Richard Hartman wrote:

>The parallel between clicking the button on a mouse
>and pulling the trigger on a gun should be pressed
>hard if this gets appealed higher.  Even better,
>a mouse click could certainly be used as the signal
>to set off explosives.  It is not the action that 
>triggers an event that is significant or insignificant,
>it is the thought that initiates that action.
>
>

-- 
Sacred cows make the best burgers

Who is John Galt?  galt@inconnu.isu.edu, that's who!!!