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

Re: EFF misstatements in DeCSS brief



I hate to sound ignorant, but I don't understand the original rationale
for, say, Disney, caring about CSS.

People I've been talking to say that it never prevented copying at all and
therefore big content providers like Disney couldn't have cared one way or
another about CSS on anti-piracy grounds.

The only plausible reason that we've came up with was to permit market
segmentation or "zoning," such as between movies and other kinds of
content, or between the States and Japan.

I'd thought maybe there was a "gatekeeper" revenue stream to be protected,
e.g., "we're charging authorized player manufacturers a licensing fee," but
I'm told there isn't any or much of a fee.

What am I missing?  What was the original business rationale for CSS?

Thanks,
Lee