[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: DeCSS Court Hearing Report (fwd)

Jim Choate <[email protected]> writes:

> No, it's actualy exactly the opposite. It will become illegal to develop, 
> market, or sell technology for the explicit purpose of violating such rights
> protection technologies.

This assumes that copyright is protecting an authors rights, which is
not the case in the U.S., where copyright is for promoting advancement
of the arts an sciences thru granting of arbitrary monopoly to the
creator of an intellectual work.  There is no notion of authorial
rights in U.S. copyright code that I am aware of.  It is not done
because authors, or their estates, have some intrinsic right to
control their works after they are published.  It is provided to give
them an incentive to publish and make the materials accesable to the
public.  The ultimate goal is benefit of the public, not protection of
some phantasmatic authorial rights.

To call them rights protection technologies is wrong in light of the
purpose of copyright.

Craig Brozefsky                         <[email protected]>
Free Scheme/Lisp Software     http://www.red-bean.com/~craig
"riot shields. voodoo economics. its just business. cattle 
 prods and the IMF." - Radiohead, OK Computer, Electioneering