Slashdot Mirror
Update On The Jon Johansen Trial
nordicfrost writes "The trial against Jon Johansen goes on. Today, John Hoy of the DVD CCA was examined by phone by the defense and the prosecutor in Oslo. We have set up a page to follow the main events in the trial here, in English. The documentation of evidence, and the fact that Hoy didn't answer the phone when the court called, delayed the trial so the final proceedings may not be finished before Monday afternoon." Update: 12/12 23:50 GMT by T : This wasn't really a Science story ...
No. The tenets of basic economics are hurting the legitmate consumers every time the MPAA accuses someone of stealing DVDs. The fact of the matter is that DVD piracy is almost nonexistent in North America - unlike MP3s, which can be and are downloaded and burned to CD in minutes, inexpensively. The time and cost of copying DVDs is huge in comparison. DVD piracy just isn't here on a large enough scale to warrant any price increase. Its the same reason gas prices are on the rise in every country on the planet - its making a very small number of people very, very rich.
What Hoy is insinuating here, is that the DVD CCA has a government granted monopoly on anything CSS related. Judge Kaplan bought it, but it's simply not true. If the DVD CCA wanted a monopoly on decoding DVDs, they should have applied for a patent.
I don't know what the law is in Finland, but in the United States it is unconstitutional for the government to mix patents and copyrights.
Yes, you're right: Jon Johansen never was a saint. No one in their right mind asked him to be one. He was a 15 year old script kiddie when DeCSS was written. He preferred FreeBSD to Linux (maybe without any rational reason), but that's not the case, and it never was. He might have violated the GPL, and then - he might not (search for "special licence"). That's also beside the point in this case.
Whether the defendant is a good guy or a bad guy should be irrelevant in any legal case in a civilized state. It shouldn't matter. It's just not relevant. Bring him to trial for infringement of the GPL instead, or for not being a good poster boy. It's still irrelevant to this case. You're not a good poster boy yourself for free software, and neither am I, Stalin, Hitler, GWB, Saddam Hussein or Mother Theresa. It's hardly illegal.
Of course, if his motives were to pirate films (which I doubt - why would he post to the LiVid mailing lists then?), he could be judged for contributing to copyright infringement. But he has contributed to developement of free DVD players for Linux, QNX, Windows, *BSD, BeOS, etc., just by releasing the source. Breaking the CSS algorithm was the most important thing about DeCSS. Today it's just an old-fashioned prototype to libdvdcss, used in most free DVD players. And by the way, Jon Johansen has contributed to such players. (Just search for his last name on that page.)
The point is: the priciple of DeCSS is important to the developement of free DVD software. Without DeCSS, no libdvdcss: no xine, no MPlayer, no Ogle, no VideoLAN. We need to break the encryption to read DVD's. And we need the right to do so.
1. They want to recieve license fees for every dvd-capable video player in existence.
2. They want every dvd-capable video player in existence to work by their rules-- i.e., the ones that allow content producers to completely set what it is possible to do with each disc.
I agree, but think you miss the point here:
the linux community" will not truly be happy using a closed source video player-- there will always be the person upset he couldn't play dvds on his 10-year-old sparc because the "approved" propeitary player is x86 and PPC only. But much more importantly, this is a problem because open source platforms inherently empower the user.
That user has every right to be angry, as do you. The DVD consortium has, with help from a few friends, make it a crime for you to figure out how to use your own equipment or even tell others how to do the same. It's a concept that matters and should not be belittled with absurd examples like trying to make a computer that does not have an IDE interface run a DVD player. Trade secrets should have no force outside of a signed contract, and should never trump free speech. My purchasing a DVD player is not equivalent to me signing a contract. "Open" OS only empower users to the extent that they have source code. If you don't have the power to help your friends do things there will be no free code and no Open OS and you will be at the mercy of those who exploit you to maintain tools you can't use.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.