Re: Linux 2.2.20pre10

As the person  who first brought Iraq into this thread, I have to say this:  If
you think I was comparing the US to Iraq then you're mistaken.  I was merely
pointing out Iraq (semi-jokingly) as an example of a country that would not care
about enforcing US laws.

Wayne

Alan Cox <[e-mail]> on 10/22/2001 03:28:38 PM

To:   [e-mail] (Tudor Bosman)
cc:   [e-mail] ([e-mail]) (bcc: Wayne
      Brown/Corporate/Altec)

Subject:  Re: Linux 2.2.20pre10

> 1. A description of a security hole is constitutionally protected
> speech, and as such cannot be construed as violating the sections of the
> DMCA.  If such description fits the definition of "technology, product,
> service, device, component, or part thereof", then we're in big trouble,
> because source code itself is much closer to the definition of a
> "product" than a description of the source code.

I firmly believe that if justice prevails in the existing DMCA cases you
will be shown to be right. I've seen people compare the US to Iraq and
I don't buy that.

However until people stop shooting I'd prefer not to be a potential target.

Alan