> On Mon, 1 Apr 2002, Wayne M. Smith wrote:
>
> > > The Digital Millenium Copyright Act was no less ridiculous, and is now
> > > Federal law. In the many times that law has been invoked, not one case
> > > has involved the mass distribution pirates its proponents claimed to
> > > target.
> >
> > Wrong. 4500+ copies is "mass distribution."
> >
> > http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/03/29/video-bootleg.htm
>
> Cool. I missed hearing about that.
>
> > In any event, the DMCA was intended to address not only those who distribute copies, but those who provide "circumvention
devices"
> > that enable others to engage in mass distribution. Doesn't it make as much sense to go after those involved in "mass
distribution"
> > of the circumvention device, such as DeCSS?
>
> DeCSS was a huge red herring. It was originally developed to _watch_
> DVD movies, not _copy_ them.
The reason why something is developed is really not that relevant to how it may ultimately be used -- we (the US) build weapons of
mass destruction as a deterrent to keep the peace, but they're clearly capable of great evil. If you're referring to the that DeCSS
was developed because there was no Linux DVD player, this story is apocryphal. DeCSS is a Windows-only executable file; there never
was a Linux version, and the claim that it was developed as a Windows file because Linux didin't support the DVD file structure is
nonsense. Moreover, if you need the windows OS to decrypt a DVD, then you already have a computer that can play the DVD.
Received on Tue Apr 02 2002 - 02:26:43 BST