Re: [cpe:4972] ISBN and EAR

[TruthMonger <tm@dev.null>]

Steve Schear wrote (without any carriage returns, forcing me to
do his goddamn editing for him):
 
> The Administration, through the EAR, has attempted to maintain 
the fiction that there is a qualitative difference between intellectual
works made tangible in paper and those in electronic form.  Can a 
Federal court's introduction of evidence procedure be used to establish
the interchageability of IP works in paper and elecronic form and if so
can these rules be applied to the EAR?

  Certainly, if a decent attorney is given sufficient financial 
incentive to pursue the matter.
  A lot of 'case law' is based on the bottomless pit of government
legal funding setting precedents in cases where short-funded defence
lawyers and defendants/plaintiffs cannot afford the time and expense
to adequately match the government's ante and/or raises in the legal
poker game.
  i.e. - the government agents 'buy the pot.' (no pun intended)

  Bad and marginal legal rulings accumulate to establish a base of
questionable legal precedent. When a legal concept is later challenged
in a case where the stakes are high, the defense/plaintiffs often have
the cards already stacked against them.
  i.e. - the odds are *always* with 'the house.'

> The ISBN system was established in 1968 as a standard for books and 
other monographic publications. Today, the scope of the system has 
expanded to include other media such as calendars, spoken word 
audiocassettes, videocassettes and electronic media.
> 
> Might this direction a legally fruitful way to overturn the EAR
  fiction?

  Certainly, as long as a challenge is not mounted by a terroist,
pedophile, drug-dealer, cryptographer, nigger, queer, or <shudder>
<barf> LIBERAL.

  Not that I'm getting cynical in my old age, but if one wants to
make a true difference in this regard they might consider foregoing
the usual legal challenges and punching out their spouse's lover
on the Jerry Springer show.
  Nixon was framed!

TruthMonger