Flaming to/from courts

The nastiness in the material from N2H2 in Edelman v. N2H2 reminds me a great deal of the judicial flaming done by Judge Kaplan in the DeCSS case. In particular, the remarks about the plaintiffs and defendants here:

VI. Conclusion

In the final analysis, the dispute between these parties is simply put if not necessarily simply resolved.

*346 Plaintiffs have invested huge sums over the years in producing motion pictures in reliance upon a legal framework that, through the law of copyright, has ensured that they will have the exclusive right to copy and distribute those motion pictures for economic gain. They contend that the advent of new technology should not alter this long established structure.

Defendants, on the other hand, are adherents of a movement that believes that information should be available without charge to anyone clever enough to break into the computer systems or data storage media in which it is located. ...

His sympathies were clear ...

By Seth Finkelstein | posted in legal | on October 04, 2002 11:17 PM (Infothought permalink)

Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog (Wikipedia, Google, censorware, and an inside view of net-politics) - Syndicate site (subscribe, RSS)