[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?

To: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
From: Ernest Miller <ernest.miller(at)aya.yale.edu>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 09:32:53 -0700
In-reply-to: <255195E927D0B74AB08F4DCB07181B904C5726@exchsj1.onetouch.com>
References: <255195E927D0B74AB08F4DCB07181B904C5726@exchsj1.onetouch.com>
Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624

The copyrighted content in this case was the code the operated the 
garage door opener.  I've been engaged in some debate on the issue here:
http://research.yale.edu/lawmeme/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1187

Richard Hartman wrote:

>btw: to qualify for DMCA the TPM must be protecting some copyrightable content.  AFAICT the garage doors were protecting cars, not content.  Why wasn't the claim dismissed as inapplicable?
>
>
>  
>

References:
- RE: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
  - From: "Richard Hartman" <hartman@onetouch.com>

Prev by Date: RE: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
Next by Date: RE: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
Previous by thread: RE: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
Next by thread: Re: [dvd-discuss] did everyone already see this?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread