Jim Henderson wrote:
> Are you talking about Vault v. Quaid Software Ltd?  (Vault made software 
> called Prolock that was used to provide copy protection of computer 
> software)

That's the case I'm thinking of, yes.

> But the fifth Circuit Cort of Appeals did hold that the license 
> agreement's provisions were unenforceable because federal copyright law 
> pre-empted the Louisiana License Act.

Right.

> That would seem to set a precedent that federal law trumps state law; 
> DMCA, being a federal law, prohibits reverse engineering, and whether you 
> or I or anyone likes the DMCA, it is a current law on the books that 
> specifically prohibits circumventing technological measures put in place 
> to prevent illegal copies from being made.

Right. That's why I said "DMCA notwithstanding".

"Illegal copies." Now, is it OK to circumvent to make legal copies? That's 
what I was trying to say before - I think there's specifically language in 
the DMCA to allow circumvention of necessary to use the material as intended.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message