[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] close to the proverbial bone
- To: "'dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] close to the proverbial bone
- From: Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 14:31:36 -0800
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Zulauf [mailto:johnzu@ia.nsc.com]
...
> but the evil of the DMCA is that the circumvention tools are illegal
> whether or not there is any evidence of copyright
> infringment.
Ok ... how about a hypothetical running in a different direction ...
I write a virus. The main portion of it is encrypted (except
for the self-decryptor). As it operates it decrypts it's payload,
executes & deletes all unencrypted portions again.
So ... would the anti-virus makers be liable under the DMCA
for bypassing my access protection mechanism in order to create
a utility to clean up after my virus?
--
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com
186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!