On 2/16/2011 8:17 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> could argue that everything *prior* to the addition of those was fair
>> game, more or less, if you could engineer the means to see it,
>
> If it's coming into your house and there aren't laws about it, then
> sure. And indeed, that's generally how it was looked upon. But then the
> politicians passed laws making it illegal to build/use/etc a receiver
> for the frequencies which were reserved for people paying for content.
>
>> something about the people that just happened to know how to make a
>> receiver (or bought one, for legit use).
>
> I don't know where encryption comes into it, then. You could equally say
> "fair game for people who know how to break the encryption", which is
> exactly what the DMCA is addressing.
>
Except, that is legal to do, for "your" media, but not for broadcast. 
I.e., DVD decoding, where no other option exists. But, if there is 
another option, then it is still illegal. Bloody mess, really.

-- 
void main () {
   If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message