Re: [dvd-discuss] Comment to the Senate Judiciary Committee

["Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz(at)aero.org>]

Yes. I know...I have a BearCat scanner and it has the "image" rejection 
problem mentioned in the FCC docket..It's really too bad that the FCC has 
gotten rather technologically challenged these days....BTW try finding 
some of the professional receivers for radio pagers in the catalogs or 
on-line. I've held one model in my hands that isn't even listed in the 
manufacturers on-line catalog. (I was consulted by some people whose 
question was"what is this thing?")

BTW, the WP version is on the previous page without a title.




"Arnold G. Reinhold" <reinhold@world.std.com>
Sent by: owner-dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
03/18/02 12:25 PM
Please respond to dvd-discuss

 
        To:     dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: [dvd-discuss] Comment to the Senate Judiciary Committee


>Good thoughts.Write them up and send them to the judiciary.
>
>I had similar thoughts when I read Peter's comments and have been
>formulating my own comments to the judiciary. I wouldl amplify this
>concern. Not only is the DVD, CD, my PERSONAL property. SO too is the
>device upon which it plays. That is also my personal property. As my
>personal property I have abolute rights to do with it as I chose and that
>includes reverse engineering, tinkering, modifying it, integrating it 
into
>other equipment, scraping it or deintegrating it. Furthermore, I have FA
>rights to tell others how to do that and communicate what I do, know to
>others.
>
>The senate and hollywood belief that the majority of the world are couch
>potatoes experiencing their entertainment systems is rather offensive to
me.

Unfortunately there is a precedent in the laws governing radio 
scanners. One upon a time, Americans believed that they had the right 
to listen to anything that was broadcast on the airwaves.  To prevent 
the public from demanding that cell phones be encrypted, Congress has 
passed ever more restrictive laws regarding receivers capable of 
receiving cell phone frequencies.  They now must be made tamper proof 
and mere modification is illegal as is importing a unit from overseas 
where such reception is permitted. See for example 
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Notices/1998/fcc9810 
0.txt

On a separate note, could you send a copy of Landes and Posner to:


Prof. Tom Zaslavsky
500 Dencary Lane
Endwell, NY 13760

Thanks,

Arnold