[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Disney Does Self Destructing DVDs
- To: <dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Disney Does Self Destructing DVDs
- From: "Richard Hartman" <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 14:24:41 -0700
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Thread-index: AcM1C7wwQI9wGiCkRMS8IBE61f8XKgACvSDg
- Thread-topic: [dvd-discuss] Disney Does Self Destructing DVDs
Yeah, exactly. Not only that, but you have more
incentive to do just that than if the DVD did
not self-destruct. If this 2-day disc thing
becomes widespread, DVD-ripping is going to become
a common skill, not just one for techno-geeks.
-Richard M. Hartman
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah silva [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 1:07 PM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Disney Does Self Destructing DVDs
> I don't quite get this. I could buy the DVD, copy it to the
> hard drive,
> and then let it self-destruct.
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Roy Murphy wrote:
> > 'twas brillig when Richard Hartman scrobe:
> > > I don't know that a chemical process qualifies as a Technical
> > > Protection Measure under the DMCA.
> > I think it's pretty clear that it does not qualify. Look at
> the statute.
> > A TPM "'effectively controls access to a work' if the
> measure, in the
> > ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of
> > information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the
> > copyright owner, to gain access to the work"
> > The self-erasing DVD does not require the application of
> information or
> > a process to accomplish its self-erasing function. All it
> requires is
> > exposure to the air.
> > Roy Murphy \ CSpice: A Mailing List for Clergy Spouses
> > firstname.lastname@example.org \ http://www.panix.com/~murphy/CSpice.html