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

["Dean Sanchez" <DSanchez(at)fcci-group.com>]

(Tongue-in-cheek comment follows)
Even though this is just a case of being punished for having the questionable taste of listening to Dion (ouch!), we have lost sight of what Congress obviously intended and that was to protect the intellectual property of corporate copyright holders from evil hackers (i.e. citizens). Corporations must have the right to hack systems; otherwise, those evil hackers (can you say customers?) will listen to the music on unauthorized systems and do all kinds of other things (be innovative, maybe?) that they shouldn't.  Skip over commercials (how dare they?), make rip cds that consist of only the songs they like (artistic integrity demands that you listen to it all!), etc.
(END of TIC)

Seriously, what do you think Direct TV has been doing for years?  Take the case where it sent a signal that not only disabled the ability to decrypt the any further signals, but actually damaged the personal physical property of someone else. Whether you agree or not that decrypting the signal is ethical or unethical, intentionally damaging another's property (which is what DTV does) is definitively not ethical and is illegal in almost every other instance.  That is a vigilante action; this type of action should be reserved to the justice system penalty phase after due process.

However, this is not the only instance where the government is looking to 'delegate'.  UTICA strives to give software vendors the authority to remotely shut off systems thereby possibly creating business and system damage.  It also has a goal of indemnifying the vendor from any product liability.

There is a consistent pattern in all these actions. It's fairly obvious that the Copyright Industry's goal along with Congress' complicity is to allow the IP holders/owners to have the ability to do things that is or would be illegal for ordinary citizens (and corporations) to do and would normally be reserved to the justice system.  Congress has seen fit to criminalize an action (copyright infringement) that deserves only civil sanctions and action.  It then allows the alleged victim the right to impose, without due process, the penalty that in itself should be a criminally prosecuted action.  Please pardon my cynicism, but while I see it as an abrogation of the courts' and governments' responsibility, do we really expect the courts to deviate too much from the stance that it's okay for the corporations to do whatever they need to do in order to protect IP?



-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Hartman [mailto:hartman@onetouch.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 11:20 AM
To: 'dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu'
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Dion's new CD crashing party for some users


The court does not have to "extend" the law ... they're covered
as the law is written.  If the court interprets the law otherwise,
that interpretation should be appealed.

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

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