RE: [dvd-discuss] Judge Rejects Challenge to eBook Case

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

This is why a little  bit of disection on TWIKI might be of some use....if not 
a spleen venting...I've read a bit more of the opinion and the judge almost 
taunts the Ds

On 14 May 2002 at 17:16, Richard Hartman wrote:

From:           	Richard Hartman <hartman@onetouch.com>
To:             	"'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-
discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Subject:        	RE: [dvd-discuss] Judge Rejects Challenge to eBook Case
Date sent:      	Tue, 14 May 2002 17:16:41 -0700
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael A Rolenz [mailto:Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org]
> > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 12:54 PM
> > To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > Subject: [dvd-discuss] Judge Rejects Challenge to eBook Case
> > 
> > 
> > <Snip-good stuff from EFFector 15.13 deleted. >
> > 
> > Electronic Frontier Foundation Media Release
> > Judge Rejects Challenge to eBook Case
> > Rules Digital Copyright Law Trumps Free Speech
> > For Immediate Release: Wednesday, May 8, 2002
> > 
> > San Jose, CA - A federal judge today denied a Russian 
> > software vendor's 
> > request to dismiss criminal charges against the company for 
> > violations of 
> > the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
> > 
> > 
> > <Snip>
> > 
> > Despite acknowledging a lack of clarity in the Congressional record 
> > surrounding the adoption of the DMCA, Judge Whyte ruled that 
> > due process 
> > was not violated. He said the plain meaning of the DMCA 
> > statute was to ban 
> > 
> > circumvention tools completely because Congress had assumed 
> > that "most 
> > uses" of the tools would be for unlawful infringement rather 
> > than fair or 
> > noninfringing uses.
> > 
> 
> I believe that the DMCA explicitly mentions that nothing
> in the act should be taken to negate fair use provisions.
> 
> Congress could NOT have meant to ban circumvention tools
> completely if that clause is included.
> 
> -- 
> -Richard M. Hartman
> hartman@onetouch.com
> 
> 186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!