[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's decision (longish)
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's decision (longish)
- From: microlenz(at)earthlink.net
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:07:12 -0800
- In-reply-to: <20011130002313.A6172@clausfischer.com>
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0111291741100.15250-100000@qwe3.math.cmu.edu>; from crosby@qwes.math.cmu.edu on Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 05:57:57PM -0500
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
Or rather copyright should not be extended to a multitude of things
merely to provide protection for a special interest...
Date sent: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 00:23:13 +0100
From: Claus Fischer <claus.fischer@clausfischer.com>
To: Scott A Crosby <crosby@qwes.math.cmu.edu>
Copies to: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Some opinions on the appellate court's decision (longish)
Send reply to: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 05:57:57PM -0500, Scott A Crosby wrote:
>
> : So, since blueprints are now fully functional, have they lost
> copyright?
>
> Exactly. The point is, the capability of machines is ever increasing,
> and many things which are not done yet are not a matter of capability
> but merely of cost and efficiency. Do we want to allow all speech
> which has potentially functional aspects to lose its protection?
>
> Claus
>
> --
> Claus Fischer <claus.fischer@clausfischer.com>
> http://www.clausfischer.com/