mail at itam.ws
Mon May 7 21:10:18 UTC 2007
Matthew Brown wrote:
> I know you're playing dumb to make a point -
> but the US law in question bars components of a contravening device,
> and the code given is definitely an important part of a HD-DVD
> decryption device, because without one of these you cannot decrypt the
> content. There are other components needed, but they are also
> available - the encryption scheme itself I believe is publicly known
> (deliberately so, so that it could be peer-reviewed).
> This number has no known real purpose except for being a HD-DVD key.
> (Yes, I know that people are rushing around trying to find other
> purposes for it as an excuse for keeping it available, but that
> doesn't change things)
Matt I am not playing dumb I really didnt (want to) know, but I am not
unintelligent. You now did explain to me that I can use others
components with this number to crack HD-DVD. So did you doing this
violate law? Or will I violate law when I crack HD-DVD (which I don't
have), Oh can people that don't have HD-DVD be prosecuted if they use
this number in documents?
Is someone walking along the street with a stone in the hand, should
police arrest him for possibility to brake window? And stone on the
street don't have any real purpose than to break the window? Or should
Police arrest them self for making up about stone and window, as that is
My point is that sharing of number (stones, knifes,...) cant be
violation of law. And reaction of people here is just good fact how some
powerful group can influence with fear and affect people to give up
their free speech right.
More information about the foundation-l