[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Latest RIAA Tactic- Impersonating a Police Officer
- To: <dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Latest RIAA Tactic- Impersonating a Police Officer
- From: "Richard Hartman" <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 09:22:15 -0800
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)eon.law.harvard.edu
- Thread-index: AcPddw1Ff7WlKo/5Q2WUl6DaU7K3NQBOUEoQ
- Thread-topic: [dvd-discuss] Latest RIAA Tactic- Impersonating a Police Officer
Copyright infringement and the DMCA are two separate things.
The DMCA enforces the removal by technological means of use rights
that we nonetheless retain under actual copyright law. This bypasses
the entire legal system and puts the force of law behind the whims
of the media interest groups. This is arguably unconstitutional in
the way that "due process" is negated, and should be opposed by any
and every means available.
Copyright is a long-standing and useful practice. True, recent
legislation has (over)extended copyright to the point of idiocy, but
the concept of copyright itself is nonetheless worth supporting. I might
support _limited_ "civil disobedience" regarding copyright infringement
if you put some sort of boundary on it, such as respecting a shorter
term but anything over X years is considered "public domain" by your
protest group, however the attituted conveyed by your question "Why
shouldn't anybody condone copyright infringement?" seems to go beyond
-Richard M. Hartman
186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeme A Brelin [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2004 7:57 PM
> To: Openlaw DMCA Forum
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Latest RIAA Tactic- Impersonating a Police
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 email@example.com wrote:
> > Well Jason...if you read this, you have either been
> misquoted or need to
> > reread the Constitution - there is the due process clause and while
> > nobody should condone copyright infringement, there is
> still that little
> > issue that must be addressed.
> Why shouldn't anybody condone copyright infringement?
> The state is condoning a few privateers' and robber barons' efforts to
> break what I see as moral and ethical law. I condone the
> breaking of the
> law when the law does not support my beliefs.
> Civil disobedience is an important part of making changes to
> the status
> Jeme A Brelin
> [cc] counter-copyright