| |||||||||||||
The two-edged nature of the DMCAThe two-edged nature of the DMCAPosted Sep 5, 2002 3:40 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722)Parent article: The two-edged nature of the DMCA
I'm not sure I agree that we should be on Adobe's side in the suit they are bringing. Their suit seeks to make a distinction between their product and the free tools so that they don't have to fight against the DMCA along with the less well-funded people who have to deal with it. The DMCA has no merit, but neither does Adobe's suit, since it is too narrow a precedent to be useful to anyone else.
(Log in to post comments)
The two-edged nature of the DMCA Posted Sep 5, 2002 14:37 UTC (Thu) by Odinson (guest, #1402) [Link] That is exactly what we need. We need a logical fairminded judge to outright say, "This is rediculeous, this law contridicts itself and the first amendment." and if he sees the defense asserting things not in the law like the differance between closed and open software, he may examine the law closely enough to do that.Of course this will be another dud if the prosicution is not witty enough to present the lack of legal backing in that assertation. But any negitivity about the DMCA uttered by a judge in his ruling will help future cases down the line. Given enough court exposure the DMCA will die. And I think that acrobat authorship and the font format origin might just make the mindlessness of banning a useful tool instead of the act of misuse of a feature a little more clear.
|
|||||||||||||