Re: [dvd-discuss] Life vs. profits -- the court thinks profits are more important

["Steve Hosgood" <steve(at)caederus.com>]

John Zulauf wrote:
> Compare and contrast [the "Nuremberg files" case] with the DeCSS rulings in
> before the lower and appeals courts and the Sklyarov case.  These courts
> seem to think that actions taken by an "unrelated third party" that may
> infringe a copyright allows the banning of the CSS related speech.
> 
> [...]
> 
> It seems that when lives are on the line speech is free, but not when
> corporate profits are risk...
> 

Was the example of the "Nuremberg Case" cited in the 2600 appeal? If not, then
obviously the courts wouldn't have taken notice of its decision to support
free speech (actually free writing) despite possible future misuses by others.

That decision (if considered) certainly should have been seen to be a legal
precedent supporting the 2600 defence...

--

Steve Hosgood                               |
steve@caederus.com                          | "A good plan today is better
Phone: +44 1792 203707 + ask for Steve      |   than a perfect plan tomorrow"
Fax:   +44 70922 70944                      |              - Conrad Brean
--------------------------------------------+
        http://tallyho.bc.nu/~steve         |  ( from the film "Wag the Dog" )