Kelly Lynn Martin wrote:
>
> I didn't say I approved of the DMCA. DMCA is one of the most anal
> pieces of legislation to roll out of Congress in ages. And we can
> thank the Church of Scientology for it, too.
>
I didnt mean to imply that you did. however, the MPAA and RIAA portray
the DMCA
On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:02:25 -0600, Snarfblat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Yes. So now anything that is encrypted for security reasons.
>Anything at all, a book, CD's, DVD's etc. Are under the exclusive
>rights of the copyright holder. Not just the content, but how, when,
>and where you can even
Kelly Lynn Martin wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:32:30 -0600, Snarfblat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >Actually, its the DCMA that prohibits certain reverse engineering.
>
> DMCA only prohibits the reverse-engineering of a "copyright license
> management system". Generally, reverse engineer
Snarfblat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> KU4QD wrote:
> >
> > That isn't the main problem issue. There are two: one is that reverse
> > engineering would become illegal. So... you'd have to rip out your MS Office
> > filters and the like from things like KOffice and Star Office, in effect
> > gu
On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:32:30 -0600, Snarfblat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Actually, its the DCMA that prohibits certain reverse engineering.
DMCA only prohibits the reverse-engineering of a "copyright license
management system". Generally, reverse engineering is neither
permitted nor forbidden b
KU4QD wrote:
>
> That isn't the main problem issue. There are two: one is that reverse
> engineering would become illegal. So... you'd have to rip out your MS Office
> filters and the like from things like KOffice and Star Office, in effect
> guaranteeing the MS monopoly. For Adobe, that means
