[IP] -- more on -- "DVD-copying code loses free speech shield"

[Dave Farber <dave@farber.net>]

> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:11:57 -0400
> From: Rick Adams <Rick.Adams@Cello.Net>
>
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-Spam-Filtered-At: eList eXpress <http://www.elistx.com/>
>
> That is not a fair summary of the ruling (which I just finished reading)
>
> If says that IF the code is trade secret, then the first amendment does 
> not give anyone the
> right to post it online.
>
> They make it very clear that they are assuming as fact that the code is 
> trade secret and that
> their opinion is very narrow.
>
> They also make clear that there is some question as to whether the code is 
> still trade secret
> and remand it to the appeals.
>
> Quote from the conclusion of the opinion:
>
>         Our decision today is quite limited. We merely hold that the 
> preliminary
>         injunction does not violate the free speech clauses of the United 
> States and
>         California Constitutions, ASSUMING [italics in original] the 
> trial court properly issued
> the     injunction
>         under California's trade secret law. On remand, the Court of 
> Appeal should
>         determine the validity of this assumption.
>
> http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/dvd/dvdccabnnr82503opn.pdf if you want 
> to read the actual
> decision.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com [mailto:owner-ip@v2.listbox.com] On Behalf 
> Of Dave Farber
> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 4:57 PM
> To: ip@v2.listbox.com
> Subject: [IP] "DVD-copying code loses free speech shield"
>
>
>
> >Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:29:47 -0400
> >From: newsfeeds@tracerlock.com
> >Subject: news item: "DVD-copying code loses free speech shield"
> >To: dave@farber.net
> >
> >The following news item was just submitted to the news feed:
> >      Censorship News
> >
> >Title: DVD-copying code loses free speech shield
> >URL: http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-5067665.html
> >Time: 2003-08-25 15:01:23
> >News site: News.com
> >Description: The California Supreme Court has ruled that the First
> >Amendment does not extend to protection of computer code posted online, in
> >ruling against a Web publisher that had posted code for a program that
> >would decrypt the copy-protection mechanism on commercial DVDs.  The
> >software had been developed by Norwegian teenager Jon Johansen to enable
> >him to play DVDs on a Linux computer.
> >
> >
> >You are currently subscribed as: dave@farber.net
> >To unsubscribe from this news feed, click the following link:
> >http://www.tracerlock.com/unsubscribe-news-feed.cgi?uid=580&id=4317
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as ricknews@cello.net
> To manage your subscription, go to
>   http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

-------------------------------------
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/