[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss]http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,28875,00.html
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss]http://www.thestandard.com/article/0,1902,28875,00.html
- From: Jolley <tjolley(at)swbell.net>
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 21:02:33 -0500
- Organization: Southwestern Bell Internet Services
- References: <E06ADA0073926048AD304115DD8AB6BC9D66C9@mail.onetouch.com>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
Richard Hartman wrote:
>
> >From the article Andrea cited:
>
> <blockquote>
> Given the relative infancy of XXXXX, it is premature to
> consider any legislative change at this time," the report states.
> </blockquote>
>
Replace XXXXX with one of the following:
murder
piracy
arson
rape
burglary
fraud
assault and battery
libel
kidnapping
and finally the original
digital rights management
They don't see the abuse and evil in "digital rights management" yet.