James A. Donald writes:
> It is a test of will and power. Kaplan took offense at the widespread
> attitude that such an act was beyond the power of a judge, that judges not
> only should not censor thei internet, but that they *could* not censor the
> internet, that the internet was strong
Kevin Blanchard wrote:
>
> In fact I think spreading the DeCSS is a GREAT idea. If they are trying to
> stop people from posting it, I think an email circulation is also in order.
>
> I do not believe it should be down as a rebellion but history has shown the
> technology advances happen more oft
In fact I think spreading the DeCSS is a GREAT idea. If they are trying to
stop people from posting it, I think an email circulation is also in order. I
do not believe it should be down as a rebellion but history has shown the
technology advances happen more often because of hackers, crackers,etc
--
At 12:40 PM 8/30/2000 -0700, Ernest Hua wrote:
> So I just don't get why (other than perhaps
> Kaplan was too personally close to the film
> industry) Kaplan can rule against DeCSS.
It is a test of will and power. Kaplan took offense at the widespread
attitude that such an act was be
> Ernest Hua wrote:
>
> Can someone point me to the argument where
> either Judge Kaplan or some motion picture
> industry person claims publication of DeCSS
> code results in imminent or irreparable
> harm?
Most or all the arguments on both sides are archived at:
http://www.eff.org/cafe/
The
Title: DeCSS and imminent harm ...
Can someone point me to the argument where
either Judge Kaplan or some motion picture
industry person claims publication of DeCSS
code results in imminent or irreparable
harm?
It seems to me that if you (whether "you"
refers to a lowly indiv
