RE: [dvd-discuss] Re: [free-sklyarov] adobe DMCA letters

[Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom [mailto:tom@lemuria.org]
> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 2:44 PM
> To: free-sklyarov@zork.net; dvd-discuss@lweb.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: [dvd-discuss] Re: [free-sklyarov] adobe DMCA letters
> 
> 
> On Sat, Dec 22, 2001 at 01:47:45PM -0800, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > What's the nature of the works that Adobe is seeking 
> infringement claims
> > on?  Are these infringed works of Adobe (e.g.:  software or 
> publications
> > copyrighted by Adobe), or are there copies of, say, the 
> AEBR in the wild
> > which Adobe's trying to take down WRT 512.
> 
> adobe software, in this case.
> 
> 
> I don't have a problem with adobe trying to stop software piracy. I do
> have a problem with them calling on ISPs. that's like coming home to
> find your car has been taken away without any notice or warning,
> because, say, you were caught speeding a few days earlier.
> 

Or having the Denver Boot put on because you haven't paid
your parking tickets?  Or having it repossessed because you
haven't made the payments?

Sorry, but it _does_ make sense to have your service restricted
if you are in violation.

The key phrase here is: if you are in violation.  For the cops
to put the Boot on your car there has to be a decision somewhere 
in the legal system.  The problem w/ the takedown provisions is
not that the service is restricted or taken away, but that there 
is no due process.

-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!