[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[FYI] (Fwd) FC: NY judge grants MPAA injunction against 2600.com; EF
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: [FYI] (Fwd) FC: NY judge grants MPAA injunction against 2600.com; EF
- From: "Axel H Horns" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 10:12:32 +0200
- Comment: This message comes from the debate mailing list.
- Organization: PA Axel H Horns
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:14:36 -0500
From: Declan McCullagh <email@example.com>
Subject: FC: NY judge grants MPAA injunction against 2600.com; EFF loses
Send reply to: firstname.lastname@example.org
MPAA and its member companies are stepping up their attack on the
DeCSS program -- something that is, to say the least, futile given the
nature of the Net. Demand letters for even *linking* to the program
are going out (watch out, news sites!):
MPAA won a victory in New York City today:
2600 will be required to remove the DeCSS files, as will the other
What happens next is everyone else in the universe mirrors DeCSS...
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 20:14:40 -0500
>From: John Young <email@example.com>
>Subject: NY Court Grants MPAA Preliminary Injunction
>Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan today granted a preliminary
>injunction against three defendants sued by the Motion
>Picture Association of American for offering the DeCSS
>DVD descrambling program on the Internet.
>At a three-hour preliminary hearing today in the Southern
>District of New York, arguments were presented for MPAA
>by its counsel, Proskauer Rose, and for the defendants,
>Shawn Reimerdes, Roman Kazan, and Edwin Corley a/k/a
>Emmanuel Goldstein, by the Electronic Frontier Foundation
>and Attorney Katz. EFF's attorneys, Robing Gross and Allon
>Levy, participated from its California offices by way of
>Judge Kaplan rejected every argument, point by point,
>made by the defendants and firmly endorsed, point by
>point, the claims of MPAA made under provisions of the
>Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) for protecting
>A clear link with made by this federal case with the California
>case by the plaintiffs and Judge Kaplan. MPAA counsel
>argued that the suit was reluctantly filed in response to
>widespread, global posting of DeCSS in response to
>the California suit. The judge agreed that this backlash
>warranted a preliminary injunction to prevent "irreparable
>harm" to the copyright holders, among other justifications
>which he elaborated in a lengthy statement on the case,
>its opposing arguments and law governing copyright
>and the First Amendment.
>Judge Kaplan will issue a final written version of his
>statment and order early next week. Upon completion
>of his verbal statement he signed and presented to
>counsel his order for the preliminary injunction.
>Defendants Reimerdes and Kazan were present during
>the hearing, Corely was not.
>Judge Kaplan offered a speedy trial for the suit, "as
>early as next Tuesday if you want it," he said to MPAA
>counsel. "I would like this tried as soon as possible.
>I offer you a runaway train if that's what you want. My
>schedule is clear for this."
>Defendants' counsel requested a delay and the judge
>agreed to accept an application for an alternate date.
>During the hearing it became clear which way the judge
>would rule. He repeatedly urged defense attorneys to
>get on with their argument, hectored them and lectured
>them on the law. He had earlier refused an adjournment
>in the hearing to allow the defense more time to prepare
>responses to the suit.
>Defense papers of Roman Kazan apparently were not properly
>submitted to the court in time to be considered. Judge Kaplan
>refused to allow late submission and dismissed the need for
>more time, saying, "these rapid schedules are customary in
>preliminary injunction cases, there was plenty of time to
>respond. I am obliged to rule on what the court has."
>Judge Kaplan stated there was a clear intent to break the law
>as indicated by vulgar remarks on Reimerdes' Web site. For
>emphasis on this point he repeated them as if with distaste
>on three occasions during the hearing: "the DVD CAA
>lawyers are cocksuckers."
>There was a single reporter was at the hearing in Judge Kaplan's
>chambers, Jeff Howe with the Village Voice, two observers from
>Cryptome, and the MPAA public relations representative, Ken
>Frydman, who distributed a pre-prepared victory statement from
>Jack Valenti, President and CEO of MPAA:
>"Judge Kaplan's ruling represents a great victory for creative
>artists and consumers everywhere. I think this serves as a wake-up
>call to anyone who contemplates stealing intellectual property."
>Cryptome asked Judge Kaplan after the hearing if he would answer
>questions. He said he does not speak to the press. We couldn't
>explain that's not us.
>We asked chief attorney for MPAA, Jon Baumgarten of Proskauer
>Rose, for comments. He said no, statements will have to come
>from MPAA public relations and that he would be briefing that
>We spoke with Shawn Reimerdes and Roman Kazan about their
>views of the hearing. What they said is what Jeff Howe will tell in
>another forum, tomorrow I believe.
---- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe: send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with this
text: subscribe politech More information is at
------- End of forwarded message -------