[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] DCMA Criticism in SIAM News

On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 08:43:17AM -0800, Richard Hartman wrote:
> They went after tobacco companies for things that people
> did to themselves even after the potential problems were
> well known.

actually, they went after the tobacco companies for lying and faking
evidence and lab results in order to create a false impression of the
dangers of smoking, not for selling tobacco.

even though, there *is* some logic in this, the problem is limitation.
in both sides - I don't think a total "blame only the guy who pulled
the trigger" approach is justified, either. it would let the planners
and supporters of crimes off the hook. much like in war we kill only
the regular people and let the government guys live.

> Responsiblity must attach to the person who makes the 
> choice in how something is _used_.  This is a fundamental
> principle that must be held as a standard for any law
> to meet.

yes, but the decision isn't always at the obvious level. your average
soldier, drug user/dealer or corrupted government official has a
THEORETICAL choice, but that's it.

reverse the argument: should we go after the police officers who jailed
Dmitri? the state attorney who prosecuted 2600? the congress twits who
nodded to the DMCA? or the law writers, lobbyists and movie mafia dons
who orchestrated it all?

should we, in short, attach responsibility to the USERS of the DMCA, or

maybe it really depends on whose ox it is. ;)

pub  1024D/D88D35A6 2001-11-14 Tom Vogt <tom@lemuria.org>
     Key fingerprint = 276B B7BB E4D8 FCCE DB8F  F965 310B 811A D88D 35A6