Re: Bug#156287: Advice on Drip (ITP #156287)
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:05:02PM -0400, Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>
> I'm not absolutely clear what distinction Steve's referring to, but I
> assumed it was the distinction between decoding+copying and
> decoding+playing. My understanding is that it's the decoding (i.e.,
> the circumvention) that's questionable, whether it's copied or played.
> The whole preventing copying bit is just MPIAA spin; what css actually
> does is prevent playing (i.e., interpretation of the data).
>
> Am I misunderstanding? Adding decss to drip may intuitively *seem*
> worse than adding decss to a player, but is there legal or factual
> basis for that? A circumvention device is a circumvention device;
> that's the whole point with this law.
Please let's not bring this discussing again over and over. This issue
has been beated to death several times with no result. As Sam Hocevar
pointed, we're stuck on it anyway and a good direction to take is hiring
a lawyer to analize the situation.
Btw, don't confuse decss with libdvdcss. DeCSS is a program for DVD-decoding
(somewhat) like Drip.
--
Robert Millan
"[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the
thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he
gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."
-- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)
Reply to: