Re: [dvd-discuss] ElcomSoft verdict: Not guilty

["Arnold G. Reinhold" <reinhold(at)world.std.com>]

It seems the jury went beyond the issue of willfulness. Here is an 
interesting excerpt from CNN's story on the acquittal:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/biztech/12/17/russian.programmer.ap/index.html

>The defense argued that the program merely enabled owners of Adobe 
>eBook Reader software to make copies of e-books for personal use. If 
>an owner makes a backup copy of an e-book or transfers it to another 
>device he owns, they argued, that is permitted under the "fair use" 
>concept of copyright law.
>
>Jury foreman Dennis Strader said the argument made a big impact on 
>the jurors, who asked U.S. District Judge Ronald M. Whyte to clarify 
>the "fair use" definition shortly after deliberations began.
>
>"Under the eBook formats, you have no rights at all, and the jury 
>had trouble with that concept," said Strader.

Arnold Reinhold


At 11:09 AM -0800 12/17/02, James S. Tyre wrote:
>ElcomSoft verdict: Not guilty
>By Lisa M. Bowman
>Staff Writer, CNET News.com
>December 17, 2002, 10:22 AM PT
>
>http://news.com.com/2100-1023-978176.html
>
>SAN JOSE, Calif.--A jury on Tuesday found a Russian software company not
>guilty of criminal copyright charges for producing a program that can
>crack antipiracy protections on electronic books.
...

>Because both the defense and prosecution agreed that ElcomSoft sold
>software designed to crack copyright protections, the case essentially
>turned on ElcomSoft's state of mind during the period it was offering
>the software.
>
>After much wrangling among attorneys over the definition of the word
>"willful," the judge told jurors that in order to find the company
>guilty, they must agree that company representatives knew their actions
>were illegal and intended to violate the law. Merely offering a product
>that could violate copyrights was not enough to warrant a conviction,
>the jury instructions said.