[free-sklyarov] Speech....

Ernest A. Erickson eaerme at newnorth.net
Thu Nov 29 14:29:16 PST 2001

Hash: SHA1

Okay people; WHERE does the constitution make ANY allowance/s for the
government to decide on "what" is speech?
Where did THIS power come from now?
DeCSS is just as VALID as the "scheme" used to encrypt those DVDs!
What's different here, or is one more "righteous" than the other by
WHO wrote what program?
If the government is allowed to "regulate" speech; what else will the
take under their control and regulate...LIFE perhaps?
That judges decision on government "interest" is BOGUS BULL SHIT!
The government has NO interest in ANY private, commercial or even
public work or works NOT designed of, by for or with government
assistance or
Since when does the government have any interest at all in the work/s
of another...taxation perhaps? If so, even THAT would preclude the
government intervention due to the item being taxed is NOT government
property, and must never be allowed to become government property!
I never read ANY line item, inclusion or "amendment" in the bill of
rights and the declaration of independence that gives the government
ANY right to decide on what is and is not "speech", or for that
matter; what MAY be protected speech!
What needs to be addressed as well, is just "how" the encryption
"code" can be protected as speech AND "intellectual property" while
the decryption "code" is worthy of NONE of those very same protective
measures? To manufacture, offer for sale, distribute and give away,
make readily available; BOY, they sure do beat the shit out of the
first amendment, don't they? If a person, company, corporation can
and DOES
partake in the very same act or actions, does that now mean that
"they" are the ONLY people who can make money by depriving the rest
of society 
of these very same ideals? If the "code" used to "secure" DVD video
is held as a "valid" form of "speech", then the "code" used to
DECRYPT that very same "code" MUST also be just as VALID and
protected in kind, bar none! i am still reviewing the case, so I have
read a small excerpt from the hearing at this moment, but it appears
that the judge is doing his best to TRASH the FIRST AMENDMENT and
give RIGHTS to the motion picture corporation ABOVE the RIGHTS
What right does the motion picture industry have to limit and DENY
rights of others? What legal or valid complaint can be filed for the 
"alleged" use, importation or spreading of a program that has yet
been PROVEN to have been used, or IS being used on ANY property of
the motion picture association, or ANY DVD device currently on the
PROOF is essential to a case, and without "intent" being known, and
not perceived, CAN theft or illegal action or actions be proven?
Can any harm, either financial, intellectual property or loss of
be shown and PROVEN because DeCSS merely "exists" in the computer
With the outwardly liberal authority of any judge to deny anybody's
rights would, to me, be ABSOLUTE USURPATION of rights NOT retained 
by the government, and thus are hereby ILLEGAL and UNENFORCEABLE in 
even the remotest sense and terminology!

Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>


More information about the Free-sklyarov mailing list