> Actually, there's already a case at the supreme court challenging the
> betamax precedent, it's "MGM v. Grokster" and it's scheduled for hearing
> on March 29. The EFF has a review of the case here
> (http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/)
>
> The RIAA, the MPAA, and their proxies hate the betamax decision with
> such intensity that it's a little like watching a ball of elemental
> potassium dropped into a tank of highly chlorinated water (try it
> sometime, with LOTS of safety equipment handy). They'll do just about
> anything to get that precedent set aside, and we can all expect more
> cases like this until the Congress finally gets a clue to what Copyright
> really is, and fixes the stupid mistakes that have been made in handling
> it (and patents) over the past few decades.
I find this hard to believe given how much money the MPAA donating members have
been making from video sales since that decision was handed down. Of course the
problem is that people misquote the decision. The Supreme Court found that, at
the time, Copyright Law did not disallow the ability to record a show for time
shifting purposes, but did say that Congress could modify the laws to prevent
such a behavior if they chose to.
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)