[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