[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Sen. Hatch supports remote destruction
- To: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Sen. Hatch supports remote destruction
- From: microlenz(at)earthlink.net
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:35:09 -0700
- In-reply-to: <3EF2E807.email@example.com>
- References: <3EF1FA78.29752.1345AD@localhost>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
On 20 Jun 2003 at 12:55, Lars Gaarden wrote:
Date sent: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 12:55:03 +0200
From: Lars Gaarden <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Sen. Hatch supports remote destruction
Send reply to: email@example.com
> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > On 20 Jun 2003 at 1:49, Lars Gaarden wrote:
> >>The tool, not the knowledge.
> > No... the knowledge where the tool was - the links were banned too.
> Point. And the knowledge of the inner workings of the tool too, for
> the few people out there that can grok x86 binary code.
> >>Still, unless I'm missing something, no court has still determined
> >>whether plain english is an illegal circumvention device or if the
> >>First trumps the DMCA in this case.
> > Plain English? This was discussed a few years ago but even an English
> > description can be parsed and source code made from it. So we ban English
> > parsers that create object code
> Nope. The parser couldn't be banned if it was a general structured
> english parser. However, the plain english description becomes a
> circumvention tool once someone writes a parser and someone combines
> the two.
Or writes down
Link X and Y this way
It's the slippery slope. Where does protecting so-called intellectual property
slide down into Fascism? If I think you infringe I am destroying your computer -
paraphrased from Warren Hatch of the last few days.
> >>With nontechnical judges, I think we really need a case concerning
> >>plain english to make the judge understand the issues.
> > I think you need a technical judge to understand the issues. Otherwise his
> > ruling comes down to "I don'tunderstandthecasesoI'mdoingnothing"
> Let's be realistic. How many of those do you know?
Marilyn Patel in Silicon Valley has made several enlightened technical
decisions. I've forgotten the name of the former court reporter turned judge
that types stuff into her laptop faster than her court reporter does and has an
annoying habit of scrolling back to read the record, who is in LA.
The problem is that if the judge has NO clue than the situation is similar to
the first and third Scottsboro Trials. (BTW-Judge Horton's opinion is a model
of clarity, reason, and sanity. That was the end of his career as a judge
because he may have believed reason would transcend prejudice)