Re: [dvd-discuss]2600 DROPS DECSS APPEAL

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

Ditto. I think this a mistake. Oh..one can argue stategy and such but what is 
missing is INITIATIVE!   and AUDACITY! This is the first time I am disappointed 
with the EFF (I am member #250...I just went and checked so I won't be accuesed 
of getting that wrong.). Passion from a good heart must not be quenched by cold 
counsel...(OK I'm misquoting LOTR). 

PUSH this through!
If stupidity overcomes reason then let the consequences be demonstrated ... 
Dred Scott was one of those cases....

On 4 Jul 2002 at 22:02, someone somewhere wrote:

From:           	"someone somewhere" <chaos755@hotmail.com>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss]2600 DROPS DECSS APPEAL
Date sent:      	Thu, 04 Jul 2002 22:02:06 +0200
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> WTF is this, first the felten case isn't good enough, and now this. What 
> exactly are they waiting for? Do they think the elcomsoft case will be 
> better? hello, there russian(!). All these justices lived through the cold war.
> Instead of 'hacker', it will be 'russian hacker'. That really sounds better. Or
> maybe they expect that the MPAA will sue the new york times, well forget it.  Oh
> wait, I see, their waiting until there are judges who understand technology, ok
> then, I'll check back in the year 2176.  Really really sad......
> 
> 
> >From: "Michael A Rolenz" <Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org>
> >Reply-To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> >To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> >Subject: [dvd-discuss]2600 DROPS DECSS APPEAL
> >Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 16:01:15 -0700
> >
> >http://www.2600.com/news/display.shtml?id=1233
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>