2 Apr
2002
2 Apr
'02
12:45 a.m.
It was thus said that the Great Wayne M. Smith once stated:
While DeCSS is a circumvention device, a pirate does *not* need DeCSS to
copy a DVD. DeCSS was created to allow someone the ability to *view* DVDs
the author *already owned.* Now, the author wanted to view these on a
device not blessed with the proper licensing and there in is the crux of the
matter. When I buy a DVD, what, exactly, am I getting?
-spc (I mean, besides shafted by Hollywood?)
The Digital Millenium Copyright Act was no less
ridiculous, and is now
Federal law. In the many times that law has been invoked, not one case
has involved the mass distribution pirates its proponents claimed to
target.
Wrong. 4500+ copies is "mass distribution."
http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/2002/03/29/video-bootleg.htm
In any event, the DMCA was intended to address not only those who distribute copies, but
those who provide "circumvention devices"
that enable others to engage in mass distribution. Doesn't it make as much sense to
go after those involved in "mass distribution"
of the circumvention device, such as DeCSS?