Re: [dvd-discuss] clean flicks and moral rights

[Jeremy Erwin <jerwin(at)ponymail.com>]

On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 12:18  PM, Richard Hartman wrote:

>
> Interesting.  The summary says outright that the courts
> do not recognize "moral rights" per se but should nonetheless
> attempt to accomodate them if they can find justification
> to do so in the actual legalities (in this case, the _legal_
> violation was a breach of contract).

Hmm. This case speaks of prior injunctions. Does anyone know what 
happened to the case after this decision?
This opinion, BTW, resurfaced some years back in one of Microsoft's 
briefs attacking the proposed rights of OEMs to alter the Windows 
desktop.

This article http://www.rbs2.com/moral.htm contains a number of post 
Gilliam decisions (and ones outside the second circuit) that disparage 
moral rights.

Citations (and hyperlinks) welcome.

Jeremy