Re: [dvd-discuss] Content neutral?

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

I'm afraid the rapier of logic isn't beating the club of prejudice.

Reading parts of the appelate court's decision really come down to 
little more than "well it's not too much of an imposition and the 
sanctity of intellectual property remains."

Date sent:      	Mon, 03 Dec 2001 10:43:38 -0700
From:           	"John Zulauf" <johnzu@ia.nsc.com>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Content neutral?
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> 
> 
> "D. C. Sessions" wrote:
> > 
> > Maybe someone can help me here.  I have in my hand a
> > piece of paper printed with text.  I wish to place this text
> > on the Web.  According to the 2nd Circuit, an injunction
> > against my placing this text on the Web is content-neutral.
> > 
> > Does this mean that it doesn't matter what is on that piece
> > of paper?
> 
> Great question.  How can an injuction claim to be neutral the content
> of that paper determines it's postability.  If that paper contains a
> od -h of decss.exe (and you type it in using a hew editor it's
> illegal.  If if it's a copy of the constitution (or nearly anything
> else) it is not.  So here we have content-neutral regulation based on
> the content of the text....
> 
> .002
>