[7682] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
fyi: MPAA Wins New York DeCSS Case
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com)
Fri Aug 18 19:59:37 2000
Message-Id: <200008171826.LAA21794@breakaway.Stanford.EDU>
To: cryptography@c2.net
Reply-To: Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com
From: Jeff.Hodges@kingsmountain.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 11:26:24 -0700
------- Forwarded Message
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:50:48 -0400
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
From: John Young <jya@pipeline.com>
Subject: MPAA Wins New York DeCSS Case
Judge Kaplan finds for MPAA in 93-page decision:
http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D02NYSC/00-08117.PDF
Quote:
p. 89
VI. Conclusion
In the final analysis, the dispute between these parties is =
simply put if not necessarily simply resolved.
Plaintiffs have invested huge sums over the years in producing =
motion pictures in reliance upon a legal framework that, through =
the law of copyright, has ensured that they will have the exclusive =
right to copy and distribute those motion pictures for economic =
gain. They contend that the advent of new technology should not =
alter this long established structure.
Defendants, on the other hand, are adherents of a movement that =
believes that information should be available without charge to =
anyone clever enough to break into the computer systems or data =
storage media in which it is located. Less radically, they have =
raised a legitimate concern about the possible impact on =
traditional fair use of access control measures in the digital era.
Each side is entitled to its views. In our society, however, =
clashes of competing interests like this are resolved by Congress. =
For now, at least, Congress has resolved this clash in the DMCA =
and in plaintiffs=92 favor. Given the peculiar characteristics of =
computer programs for circumventing encryption and other access =
control measures, the DMCA as applied to posting and linking here =
does not contravene the First Amendment. Accordingly, plaintiffs =
are entitled to appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 17, 2000
_______________________________________
Lewis A. Kaplan
United States District Judge
End Quote
------- End of Forwarded Message
