RE: [dvd-discuss] The 2nd Front

[Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott A Crosby [mailto:crosby@qwes.math.cmu.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 8:31 PM
> To: Jim Bauer
> Cc: dvd-discuss@lweb.law.harvard.edu
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] The 2nd Front
> 
> 
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2001, Jim Bauer wrote:
> 
> >         [No person shall circumvent a technological measure 
> for the purpose
> >         of copyright infringement that effectively controls 
> access to a work
> >         protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the
> >         preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of 
> the 2-year
> >         period beginning on the date of the enactment of 
> this chapter. ]
> >
> 
> Huh... Copyright infringement is already illegal. What does 
> this clause
> do?
> 
> Thats like saying that 'threatening someone with a plastic knife for
> purposes of robbery is illegal', when the act of robbery 
> itself is already
> illegal, and has been for decades.
> 

Nonetheless, they have those laws.  The purpose is usually
to increase a penalty.  F'r example, the "use a gun, go to
jail" laws.  Robbing a liquor store is already illegal but
if you use a gun to do the job then you're in deeper doo doo
than if you just used a knife.


-- 
-Richard M. Hartman
hartman@onetouch.com

186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!