[free-sklyarov] Re: Felten Drops Scientific Censorship Case

[Seth Johnson]

(Forwarded from DVD Discussion list,
dvd-discuss at eon.law.harvard.edu)

-------- Original Message --------
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 12:24:03 -060012:24:03 PM
From: tneu at smithmicrotech.com


It would be really nice to know the "inside track" on why
this is being done.

I understand there may be good reasons for not pursuing this
particular battle at this particular time - but my
assumption here is that there is a larger plan at work at
the EFF.   (and obviously, they have to worry about
financial solvency as well)


What concerns me is that "next time", we are probably not
likely to have such a "model citizen" as the party involved,
and for some reason long haired geeks with pigtails almost
receive an automatic presumption of guilt whenever DRM
technologies are found to be broken.


I can see how this is a good thing for scientists and
researchers, but I don't see how this is going to help
fighting digital DRMs where much of the legwork takes place
with ordinary people.

One of the whole points is that it shouldn't matter who you
are, something is illegal or not.  I'm worried that this
really solidifies the DMCA exceptions for research in a bad
way.

It enforces the definition as:

research = what world renowned scientists do at major
universities.

when it should be:

research = something someone (anyone!) does to figure
something out or learn a thing or two.


Does anyone from the EFF want to give us a few hints on the
larger strategy involved here?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
______         _ __                          Military
Intelligence
  /           ' )  )        -KC0LQL-         Honest
Politician
 / o ______    /  / _  . .                   Intellectual
Property
/ <_/ / / <   /  (_</_(_/_  -- tneu at visi.com /
http://www.visi.com/~tneu --