Re: [dvd-discuss] various reactions to supreme court travesty

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

On 20 Jan 2003 at 7:32, D. C. Sessions wrote:

From:           	"D. C. Sessions" <dvd@lumbercartel.com>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] various reactions to supreme court travesty
Date sent:      	Mon, 20 Jan 2003 07:32:36 -0700
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> On Sunday 19 January 2003 16:19, microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
> > One should not tempt fate...personally, as a former jury member and juror
> > foreperson, I hope that my time is not spent dealing with this lamentable law
> > the next time I am summoned  because as the ultimate decider of fact, there
> > are far more important questions to decide involving judgment of the lives of
> > others. I find it difficult to hold copyright infringment as a criminal
> > offense greater than the strangulation  followed by being thrown down a flight
> > of stairs of the last case I sat in judgement with others. Copyright offenses
> > are pale things that border on insignificance.
> 
> I'm not at all sure I agree.
> 
> Too many people have died for freedom of speech and other
> "thought freedoms" to blithely toss them out as worth less than
> a single life.

Many millions have already died for freedom of speech and are willing to die 
for it...but I don't know of anyone willing to die for copyright....copyright 
is not a freedom but a restraint....


> 
> -- 
> begin signature.exe
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet?

ANd the way that Bloatus Notus does it.

>