Re: [dvd-discuss]The Truly Bizarre From Hollywierd

["John Zulauf" <johnzu(at)ia.nsc.com>]

The argument is in fact:

(1) We have submitted a number of true documents due to the requirements
of discovery
(2) We will be making public statements regarding those documents to
Congress and the public
(3) If the EFF knows the content of the true documents, they will be
able to point out any inconsistencies between (1) and (2).

In short, Judge, in our lobbying and PR efforts we plan to highly spin,
bend, and distort the truth in ways we cannot before the courts.  We
want to make sure that no one can catch us in it.

I wonder if a few members of congress might find that quite an
interesting point of view, given that testimony to congress is also
frequently under oath.

microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
> 
> This was in the latest EFFector
> 
> http://www.eff.org/Cases/Newmark_v_Turner/20021002_joint_stipulation_documents.h
> tml
> 
> It makes truly bizarre reading. Anyone who opposes them is a competitor! If I
> were the Judge, I wouldn't even bother letting the Hollywierd Lawyers waste the
> court's time by speaking. Their arguments are ridiculous.