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

Re: [dvd-discuss] 2600's request for rehearing en banc denied



1. There is no preliminary injunction issue - there is a final injunction.
2. There will be more software cases in the future.
3. Which court ruled opposite how?
4. We don't know how SupCt will decided Eldred.

----- Original Message -----
From: "someone somewhere" <chaos755@hotmail.com>
To: <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 9:49 AM
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] 2600's request for rehearing en banc denied


> I agree that it would have been better to wait for eldred, however it
seems
> that if they want to appeal it, it has to come in 90 days.  I do think
that
> this is a good case to use because :
>
> 1. with the preliminary injunction, it becomes a free speech case, which I
> think could get kennedy and o'conner to look at it.
> (stevens and breyer will probably take it anyway)
> 2. it's about software, which will be a whole lot easier than a case about
a
> hardware 'cracker'.
> 3. there's a direct conflict with a californian appeals court, which ruled
> exactly oppossite.
> 4. in eldred, I think there's a good chance that they will rule that fair
> use is required by the 1st amendement, however in eldred it's only about :
> is there or not a 1st amendement right of fair use. It doesn't address to
> which extent there is. The 2600 case can give them the chance of defining
> that too.
>
>
> >From: "Ernest Miller" <ernest.miller@aya.yale.edu>
> >Reply-To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> >To: <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
> >Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] 2600's request for rehearing en banc denied
> >Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 08:27:43 -0400
> >
> >I am optimistic that Eldred will win, but it not clear to me how decisive
> >or
> >broad the win will be.  Considering how screwed up the 2600 case has
> >become,
> >I think it probably best to wait for another case or at least until
Eldred
> >has been decided.
> >
> >If Eldred is decided as favorably as I hope (not expect) it will be, then
> >the next DMCA case will give the defense a whole lot more ammo.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "someone somewhere" <chaos755@hotmail.com>
> >To: <dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
> >Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 8:23 AM
> >Subject: [dvd-discuss] 2600's request for rehearing en banc denied
> >
> >
> > > Wired is reporting that 2600's request for rehearing en banc for the
2nd
> > > circuit court of appeals is denied.
> > >
> > > http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,52609,00.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Declan McCullagh seems to suggest that it might be better not to
appeal
> >to
> > > the supreme court, my guess on this is that with scotus recently
> >accepting
> > > to hear eldred, they are willing to go against the ever increasing
> >strenght
> > > of copyright law.
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com