http://andrewferguson.net/2005/05/21/an-open-letter-to-dan-glickman/ Rejecting Your Reality and Substituting My Own Since 1986 Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:36:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 http://andrewferguson.net/2005/05/21/an-open-letter-to-dan-glickman/#comment-268 Andrew Ferguson dot NET » Holy. Freaking. Crap. Wed, 02 Nov 2005 07:38:43 +0000 http://www.andrewferguson.net/?p=828#comment-268 [...] I’m actually not quite sure where to start with this one. Half of me just wants to let out a rather long string of explicatives. The other half wants to reach out and strangle Dan Glickman, president of the MPAA. This isn’t the first time I’ve, nor will be the last time, lashed out at Dano and Company (See An Open Letter to Dan Glickman). This is compiled from BoingBoing via the Electronic Frontier Foundation (whom I am now seriously considering donating to). Here goes: [...] [...] I’m actually not quite sure where to start with this one. Half of me just wants to let out a rather long string of explicatives. The other half wants to reach out and strangle Dan Glickman, president of the MPAA. This isn’t the first time I’ve, nor will be the last time, lashed out at Dano and Company (See An Open Letter to Dan Glickman). This is compiled from BoingBoing via the Electronic Frontier Foundation (whom I am now seriously considering donating to). Here goes: [...]

]]> http://andrewferguson.net/2005/05/21/an-open-letter-to-dan-glickman/#comment-267 Ed Wed, 02 Nov 2005 07:12:59 +0000 http://www.andrewferguson.net/?p=828#comment-267 Good article, but keep in mind that in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal Studios, the judge(s) set precedent partially because a large number of networks were in agreement that time-shifting (part of the substantive evidence in the case) was completely acceptable, thus setting the views of the majority. Granted, you are correct in assuming that this decision would probably hold if a civil case were brought against the makers of the BitTorrent technology, but also keep in mind that software falls under the newer “cyber law” category which will not necessarily uphold the same precedent as other legal opinions issued in the past. However, I am in complete agreement with you. ;) Good article, but keep in mind that in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal Studios, the judge(s) set precedent partially because a large number of networks were in agreement that time-shifting (part of the substantive evidence in the case) was completely acceptable, thus setting the views of the majority. Granted, you are correct in assuming that this decision would probably hold if a civil case were brought against the makers of the BitTorrent technology, but also keep in mind that software falls under the newer “cyber law” category which will not necessarily uphold the same precedent as other legal opinions issued in the past. However, I am in complete agreement with you.

]]> http://andrewferguson.net/2005/05/21/an-open-letter-to-dan-glickman/#comment-266 Andrew Ferguson Wed, 02 Nov 2005 07:12:33 +0000 http://www.andrewferguson.net/?p=828#comment-266 Just emailed Dano. We’ll see if he feel’s like responding…which I doubt he will. Just emailed Dano. We’ll see if he feel’s like responding…which I doubt he will.

]]>