Movie Publishers, DVDs, and Access Control

[trouts1]

For my side I assumed everyone had a key. <strike>(or knew about alt.2600.crackers.)</strike> So I’m running my motor for no reason then. I have a key and am legal. So why were these guys bugging the Linux community? All they wanted to do was play their purchased copies on a Linux box. ??

[The_Ryan]

Originally posted by trouts1:
** About all I have to stand on is the overly invasive case I made above so I’ll be FF’ing over the ads and if caught hope the judge sees it my way. That is, an officer sneaks across the lawn, peeps inside the windows (without a cause warrant) and videotapes me FF’ing through a movie ad.**

Well, we aren’t discussing enforcement on the end user’s end; we’re discussing enforcement through shutting down “accomplices” who act in the open.

**
3. Distributors will have to clear space for displays describing the ads inside and explaining the detailed contract for the Valid Consent part. A signing area will have to be setup where I consummate the deal. This would obviously be detrimental to the sales of DVD’s and bad for the industry and used as an arg by the DeCSS side. Worse would be restrictions as per Arnold’s case where a specific restriction for a specific movie would have to be divulged. No end to industry stifling restrictions.**

Yes, I think that the manfs are trying to pull a fast one by requiring users to stick to a contract without ever telling them what he contract is. As to whether those “I agree” buttons are legally binding, that’s an interesting question. Any lawyers care to enlighten us? I do know that written contracts aren’t the only ones that are binding; oral contracts are binding, but they’re harder to prove that the contract exists.