Re: [dvd-discuss] Geeks in government: A good idea?

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

On 18 Aug 2002 at 18:16, Jon Lech Johansen wrote:

Date sent:      	Sun, 18 Aug 2002 18:16:11 +0200
From:           	Jon Lech Johansen <jon@nanocrew.net>
To:             	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
Subject:        	Re: [dvd-discuss] Geeks in government: A good idea?
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 09:48:22AM +0200, Tom (tom@lemuria.org) wrote:
> > 
> > correct. While I have to agree on many of Jons points, I'm fairly sure
> > on this one: That the DeCSS battle was not won in NY (obviously) and
> > neither in California, but on the internet. If you have 15000 download
> > locations, what does the opinion of a NY court matter?

Only if the civil disobedience is massive-not ones or twos or thousands but 
millions-in the USA alone. Hundreds of millions worldwide.

> 
> Not everyone considers that the most important objective. RedHat doesn't
> care that they can download the software. They want to include it in
> their distribution. Eric Corley doesn't care that he can download the
> software. He wants to make it available himself, as well as telling
> others that they can find it elsewhere. If we disregard the CSS issue
> for a moment, we're still left with the fact that the Land of the
> Free(TM) is preventing one of their citizens from using the <a href>
> tag.

That is the issue. It is not about downloading but about talking about it. 

> 
> Writing code is important, but so is fighting for RedHat's right to
> distribute said code.  

And discussing it. CSS is a flawed cryto system. While there is little to be 
gained by studying it now since its flaws were pretty obvious after Frank 
Stevenson's analysis (and I am not disparaging that or the RE that went into 
DeCSS ). THe important thing is the ability TO STUDY and DISCUSS.

> 
> -- 
> Jon Johansen
> nanocrew.net
> 
> http://www.eff.org/support/jonfund.html
> 
> MR. LEVY:  I'm sorry, your Honor. I actually have a technology expert
>   with me. Would the Court like to or would they agree to hear a very
>   brief statement on this point from that expert?
> THE COURT: No.    -- MPAA v. Reimerdes injunction hearing, 2000/01/21