[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] [OT] elcomsoft/sklyarov jury denied text of law?
- To: <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] [OT] elcomsoft/sklyarov jury denied text of law?
- From: "Richard Hartman" <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:32:55 -0800
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Thread-index: AcKnM9UmvfZEJ91GS9+H4zMsjRY5fAALnMogAQpQNRA=
- Thread-topic: [dvd-discuss] [OT] elcomsoft/sklyarov jury denied text of law?
That does seem to be the goal of the
educational system. Even those who
manage to get through school with some
level of literacy don't get taught the
basics of government and (actual) history.
--
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean Sanchez [mailto:DSANCHEZ@fcci-group.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 6:13 AM
> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] [OT] elcomsoft/sklyarov jury denied text of
> law?
>
>
> IMHO, there is a major problem with a system that doesn't
> trust its citizens to read and understand a law but expects
> the citizens to obey and even pass judgment on others based
> upon those laws.
>
> This reminds me of history that I've read concerning the
> Catholic Church and the Bible. The lay people couldn't be
> trusted to read and understand it themselves; the Church
> believed that to avoid misinterpretation (read - not agreeing
> with Church doctrine), the priests would read it and explain
> what it meant. Universal literacy is such a bitch; good
> thing the literacy rate is falling, isn't it?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James S. Tyre [mailto:jstyre@jstyre.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:54 AM
> To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] [OT] elcomsoft/sklyarov jury denied text of
> law?
>
>
> David, I agree with you; except that I'm not willing to rely on an
> ambiguous news report to conclude that the judge only
> answered questions.
>
> What the story does not say is whether the jurors were given
> written copies
> of the jury instructions. In federal court it is typical
> practice (though
> not mandatory) that the judge give the jury the instructions
> in writing,
> their own set to take into the deliberation room.[1] As the
> jury needed to
> decide whether ElcomSoft violated DMCA, the jury instructions
> (whether
> given orally or in writing) necessarily would have included
> the precise
> language of the relevant portions of DMCA.
>
> So, if the judge gave the jury the instructions in writing,
> then the judge
> in fact did what you suggest; if the judge gave the jury
> instructions only
> orally, then I would be troubled also.
>
> [1] As a general rule, the more complex the case, the more
> likely the judge
> will give the jury a full written set of the jury
> instructions. Here, the
> facts were nor complex, but the law which had to be applied
> to the facts is.
>
>