1995-11-02 - Re: S. 1284 To Amend (C) Act

Header Data

From: Andrew Loewenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>
To: “Tom Bell” <BELL@odo.law.udayton.edu>
Message Hash: 85a2227d3ffbb03beb99147526f1b73b0a6220e3102bdc3b060fa146a1d29ab5
Message ID: <9510302258.AA00471@ch1d157nwk>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-11-02 01:29:16 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:29:16 +0800

Raw message

From: Andrew Loewenstern <andrew_loewenstern@il.us.swissbank.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 09:29:16 +0800
To: "Tom Bell" <BELL@odo.law.udayton.edu>
Subject: Re: S. 1284 To Amend (C) Act
Message-ID: <9510302258.AA00471@ch1d157nwk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>  S. 1284,  s1201:  "No person shall import, manufacture or distribute
>  any device, product, or component incorporated into a device or
>  product, or offer or perform any service, the primary purpose or
>  effect of which is to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or otherwise
>  circumvent, without the authority of the copyright owner or the
>  law, any process, treatement, mechanism or system which prevents
>  or inhibits the violation of any of the exclusive rights of the
>  copyright owner under section 106."

IANAL, but I thought these types of laws were already tested and deemed  
unconstitutional in cases involving video-tape copying boxes, dual video  
cassette dubbing decks, SCMS 'scrubbers', etc...


andrew





Thread