Slashdot Mirror


Emmanuel Goldstein Profiled

Danny Ra sent us a link to a really interesting story about 2600's Emmanuel Goldstein. It's mostly about him, and his involvement with the recent DeCSS hoopla, and it's definitely worth a read since his case stands to change the face of the Net. The worst case scenario is of course the banning of links.

2 of 78 comments (clear)

  1. No, linking is transitive. by jamused · · Score: 5

    Linking is transitive...that's the whole point of the Web. If it is illegal to link to illegal material, then the page that contains that link is itself illegal material, and any pages that link to it, and any pages that link to those pages, and so on.

  2. Re:Valenti's deposition by Apotsy · · Score: 5
    Yep, I've read it. His constant "I don't know"s and "I don't recall"s are just like Clinton in his sexual harassment lawsuit, and Bill Gates in the anti-trust trial. Their lawyers appear to have given them the instruction beforehand: "Say nothing. I mean nothing. Just answer every question as 'I don't know'." The technique has a grand tradition, going back many years. Remeber the Iran-Contra scandal? Ronald Reagan swore under oath that he pretty much didn't know anything about what went on in his office!

    If what these people say is to be believed (and since they are under oath, it presumably is), then it could be taken as proof of their complete incompetence, and thus they should be removed from their positions of power and replaced by someone who at least knows what planet they are on. The fact that this doesn't happen just goes to show everone knows their supposedly sworn testimony is complete bullshit.

    Just once I'd love to see some really powerful person who thinks they're above the law get nailed for giving Reagan-esque testimony. They answer "I don't know" to some question, and the defense produces a tape of them talking about said subject, proving that they do know. That person goes to jail for perjury, and everyone lives happily ever after!