[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] EFF: Security Researchers Drop Scientific Censo rship Case
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] EFF: Security Researchers Drop Scientific Censo rship Case
- From: "Steve Hosgood" <steve(at)caederus.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 10:21:03 GMT
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
James S. Tyre wrote:
> Nah, I got it, I knew you were having fun.
Good! Meanwhile, back on the plot....
> No, your first instinct is correct. Manufacturing a case where none exists
> definitely is not kosher. Though you might enjoy one of my alternate sig
> Lodi v. Lodi, 173 Cal.App.3d 628 (1985)
Hmm. That sounds like a rather more extreme case of what I proposed. In
"Tyre vs. Seltzer" (or whatever), there are two genuine parties. The only
odd bit is that the EFF would be backing both of them, but the source of
their finances is unlikely to be of interest to a court surely?
Steve Hosgood |
firstname.lastname@example.org | "A good plan today is better
Phone: +44 1792 203707 + ask for Steve | than a perfect plan tomorrow"
Fax: +44 70922 70944 | - Conrad Brean
http://tallyho.bc.nu/~steve | ( from the film "Wag the Dog" )