Re: [dvd-discuss] Dion's new CD crashing party for some users

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

A Federal judge is likely to look at the law in context and rule that since the 
rest of the statute refers to infrastructure so too does communication. 
Personal computers are not infrastructure and the law is not applicable to 
them. BTW it's not MY abusive interpretation...it's more likely the abusive 
interpretation a court is going apply. I was being a <D/A>.

In the case of Celine Dion's latest, I don't see any difference between that 
and a CDROM where someone has deliberatly put a new virus in the setup.exe 
file. Corporation do NOT have the rights of people .

From:           	"Harry Eaton" <haceaton@hotmail.com>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Dion's new CD crashing party for some users
Date sent:      	Sat, 06 Apr 2002 07:54:00 -0500
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
> 
> >What they are trying to protect are computers that are involved in the
> >infrastructure of banking, government, medicine, or commerce <ALL bow down 
> >and
> >worship the New God.....Commerce>. That's pretty clear. That's a viable
> >interpretation....remember that if a law has a viable interpretation, that 
> >is
> >how the law is interpreted by the courts. . Unfortunatly, while I would 
> >like to
> >think that my computer is as important as those doing gold transfers at 
> >Chase
> >Manhatten Bank, clearly the law does not.
> > > >>> (B) which is used in interstate or foreign commerce or 
> >communication;
> 
> You have conveniently left out the word "communication" from *your*
> interpretation. Perhaps a federal judge would do the same, even in
> the face of the prosecution repeating "communication, communication,
> communication". e-mail is communication. I suppose to extend your
> abusive interpretation you'd narrow that to "communications infra-tructure". 
> No justification for it, but it might work to protect
> a big corporation, but certainly never an individual - I guess all
> that matters then is who comes to trial first.
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>