RE: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's decision (longish)

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

Almost makes me want to make a pixel encode ( "1"s =black and 
"0"s=white ..OK you want it reversed..No problem) representation 
of the bits a  DVD and print it out on paper and mail it to somebody 
for scanning and reconstruction..(Hey wanna be really nasty put up 
a bit flip pattern making it unusable without the "code" and getting 
DMCA protection in the process(?)..That the legal system seems 
to be fixated upon the medium indicates they don't understand the 
underlying principles (Wendy, Jim, excepted and possibly Bryan's 
Wife..OK..I seem to recall Bryan mentioned his wife was a lawyer 
but doesn't seem to show up here...lurking?  )....How to get these 
people to start fixing problems rather than bandaids on bandaids 
and wondering why the patient dies of infection....

From:           	Richard Hartman <hartman@onetouch.com>
To:             	"'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Subject:        	RE: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's decision
 	(longish)
Date sent:      	Fri, 30 Nov 2001 08:37:02 -0800
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> That _is_ the purpose of the DMCA ... in so far as the
> copyright violations that might occur on digital content.
> 
> "old fashioned" content (paper, analog recordings, etc)
> are still fair game for fair use ... for now ...
> 
> -- 
> -Richard M. Hartman
> hartman@onetouch.com
> 
> 186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: microlenz@earthlink.net [mailto:microlenz@earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 6:05 PM
> > To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's
> > decision (longish)
> > 
> > 
> > To take this one step farther....do we ban technology to stop all
> > possible copyright infringements that MAY occur sometime maybe in
> > the future? <NFW>
> > 
> > Date sent:      	Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:57:57 -0500 (EST)
> > From:           	Scott A Crosby <crosby@qwes.math.cmu.edu>
> > To:             	Claus Fischer <claus.fischer@clausfischer.com>
> > Copies to:      	<dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu> Subject:       
> > 	Re: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's decision
> > 	(longish) Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > 
> > > On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, Claus Fischer wrote:
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > As opposed to other forms of instruction, like recipes and
> > > > blueprints, where the functional aspect is not so immediate.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps it would be good to argue that for many forms of
> > > > speech (blueprings, cooking recipes) machines can be
> > > > constructed which do the same (shove in normed blueprint,
> > > > press button, get result); the only technical aspect here is
> > > 
> > > Such machine exist commercially:
> > >   http://www.google.com/search?q=3d+prototyping+
> > > 
> > > For a quick description of the technology,
> > >   http://www.spectrum3d.com/sla_disc.html
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 3D rapid prototyping machines. Feed them a blueprint for a 
> > 3d object,
> > > and they build a model. there are many variants, I know of ones
> > > that can build paper, plastic, and there may be ones that can 
> > build metal.
> > > There's one in the building next to me.
> > > 
> > > So, you could, say, feed in the blueprint of a sharp knife 
> > into such a
> > > 3d plastic prototyping system, wait a bit, and pull out a plastic
> > > knife (undetectable in an X-ray)... Or, have it build some plastic
> > > doo-dad that literally breaks into a knife-like object.
> > > 
> > > The one referenced above can build any object fitting in a
> > > 20x20x23 well.
> > > 
> > > So, since blueprints are now fully functional, have they lost
> > > copyright?
> > > 
> > > Scott
> > > 
> > 
> >