[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] The power of a click
- To: "'dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] The power of a click
- From: Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:19:49 -0800
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Zulauf [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 9:14 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] The power of a click
> mickey wrote:
> > How does one measure the effort required to click a mouse?
> In the past,
> > it was a neat thing when machines could do work "at the push of a
> > button." Today, the click is seen as an effortless way to initiate a
> > series of instructrions in a list. But the thing I am having trouble
> > figuring out is this:
> > How can a click be an effortless and mindless action, as in
> starting a
> > circumvention program, while also being used to verify that one has
> > applied careful consideration to a(n) EULA?
> OH BRAVO! (a) Either a click is a human action needed to have the
> computer conform to the will of the user -- or (b) it is a mindless
> operation to perform the envitable will of the functionality of the
> With (a) -- DeCSS has no "functionality" (in the meaning of the court)
> as it is the action of the user that circumvents
> With (b) -- the EULA's mean nothing and their is no restriction on
> reverse engineering of the CSS code (or cracking the
> licensed player to
> have desired functionality)
> I love it.
Don't be too elated, John. Courts have already held that
click-wrap agreements are unenforcable. Therefore, this
line of argument is likely to produce nothing more from
the court than a "yes ... so what's your point?"
-Richard M. Hartman
186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!