[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
NYT article and LaMacchia case
Anon wrote:
> I want to publicly thank John Young for making articles available. MOst of
> those articles I would not otherwise have seen.
I second that!
> that John offered. Was there anyone in the world, well, in the cyberworld, who
> was fooled by the article on the Microsoft acquisition of the Catholic church?
> Anyone, who after reading that piece, considered anything other than the
> creativity of the author, should be committed to St. John's Home for the
> Desperately Dumb.
Notice that Microsoft was flooded with complaints only after Rush Limbaugh
read it on his show...
> However, there was something in that article that was of concern. If the
> Massachusetts judge in the MIT student case actually said that he couldn't act
> because Congress had not enacted any laws, then it is for sure they will try to
> and they will try to act hurriedly. Hurried actions by congress are even worse
The Reuters report said:
Although U.S. District Court Judge Richard Stearns was critical of
LaMacchia's actions, he ruled he could not be prosecuted under a wire fraud
statute because it could result in a flood of actions against home computer
users copying even single software programmes for their own use.
Anonymity had nothing to do with it. It was clear cut copyright law - which
wouldn't have hurt LaMacchia as he wasn't making anything out of it, so they
tried to hit him with wire fraud, and the Judge found _that_ untenable.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "In between the breaths is
[email protected] the space where we live"
[email protected] - Lawrence Durrell
Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410
Voicemail +91 11 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA