Slashdot Mirror

Upon making an attempt at being informed(beyond having read that damn book a few years ago), I found it interesting to learn that she claimed to not be a libertarian, but is still widely regarded as such.

But in all candor, I would tell you it is outrageous filth, and we have got to do something about it. I take the tempered approach, of our distinguished chairman, and commend it. Yet, I would make the statement that if I could find some way constitutionally to do away with it, I would.

But in all candor, I would tell you it is outrageous filth, and we have got to do something about it. I take the tempered approach, of our distinguished chairman, and commend it. Yet, I would make the statement that if I could find some way constitutionally to do away with it, I would.

I have a hard time understanding it. Paul, since I traveled the country for 3 years, they said they could not understand me. Maybe I could make a good rock star. I do not know.

I believe the quote you're looking for can be found in Frank's testimony to congress during the PMRC music hearings in 1986. Read it here. It's really funny stuff. The reference to having his children exposed to all types of experiences is later in the testimony.

When DeCSS loses its trade secret status, though (and I think this is inevitable), then CSS could be inferred/REd from DeCSS.

In my opinion it already has lost trade secret status, but the judge in DVD CCA v. McLaughlin, Bunner et al. disagreed in this order. Frankly I find the idea a little weird.

"The Court is not persuaded that trade secret status should be deemed destroyed at this stage merely by the posting of the trade secret to the Internet. Religious Technology Center v. Netcom on-Line.com supra. To hold otherwise would do nothing less than encourage misappropriaters of trade secrets to post the fruits of their wrongdoing on the Internet as quickly as possible and as widely as possible thereby destroying a trade secret forever. Such a holding would not be prudent in this age of the Internet. Plaintiffs moved expeditiously, reasonably and responsibly to protect their proprietary information as soon as they discovered it had been disclosed by investigating, sending cease and desist letters all over the world and then filing suit against those who refused within two months of the disclosure. The Court is satisfied that trade secret status has not been destroyed."

Now the whole point of trade secrets is that you have to keep them secret. The judge here is apparently saying that he doesn't care that the material has already been downloaded by everyone and their grandmother. He is basically pulling the judicial equivalent of putting his fingers in his ears and going "Neener neener I can't hear you."

Even more weirdly, he cites RTC v. Netcom, where the judge came to an entirely different conclusion, though stating that he was "troubled" by it.

"While the Internet has not reached the status where a temporary posting on a newsgroup is akin to publication in a major newspaper or on a television network, those with an interest in using the Church's trade secrets to compete with the Church are likely to look to the newsgroup. Thus, posting works to the Internet makes them "generally known" to the relevant people -- the potential "competitors" of the Church. The court is troubled by the notion that any Internet user, including those using "anonymous remainers" [sic] [29] to protect their identity, can destroy valuable intellectual property rights by posting them over the Internet, especially given the fact that there is little opportunity to screen postings before they are made."

The "Church" referenced is, of course, Scientology.

Under the DMCA, a company need only notify the carrier in writing (an e-mail is sufficient) that a copyrighted document is on their site. If the carrier does not remove it, they can be held as liable as the original poster.

Not entirely true. The DMCA creates no new liabilities, and the carrier could be held liable by a theory of contributory or vicarious liability. However, this was possible before the DMCA. RTC v. Netcom

Y'know, with just a little searching you can find a TransMeta spotters page containing all sorts of interesting tidbits.