[linux-elitists] Chris DiBona vs. Copyright Maximalists

Seth David Schoen schoen@loyalty.org
Tue Dec 28 11:16:41 PST 1999


Don Marti writes:

> Attention Linux elitists:
> 
> The DVD encryption organization (what wizards, get me some
> boots so DVD crypto can make me shake in them) is suing a
> bunch of people who have distributed free software to play
> DVDs. 
> 
> Chris DiBona is going to the courthouse to protest --
> but he's not going alone.  Join the freedom lovers! 
> Fight the power!  Get Yet Another Fucking T-Shirt!
> 
> http://dibona.com/social/dvd/index.shtml

So, discussion on the SVLUG mailing list clarifies the situation somewhat; it
now seems to me that:

- The CCA has _not yet_ filed for this order.
- They will file for the order on Wednesday.
- There is no hearing on Wednesday, although there may be a hearing very soon
  after.
- They gave defendants advance notice of their intention to file for this
  order on Wednesday, because they are filing ex parte (which in this context
  means "with or without a response from the defendants", because they claim
  that an emergency exists).  California law requires an attempt to warn
  defendants before filing motions for ex parte actions against them, so the
  CCA attempted to give such notice (at the proverbial "last minute" -- it
  had to be by 10:00a today).
- Although there is no hearing, defendants and other interested parties can
  file appropriate motions with the court at various times.  Defendants could
  appear tomorrow to file oppositions to the CCA's motion (arguing, perhaps,
  that a temporary restraining order should not be granted, that the CCA's case
  does not have merit, that a TRO won't solve the problems the CCA identifies,
  that the emergency described does not exist, that an ex parte proceeding is
  not appropriate, that a TRO would harm the defendants, and that, if a TRO is
  granted, it should be strictly limited in its duration and scope, and CCA
  should have to post a bond against harm to defendants incurred as a result
  of the TRO, for instance).  If they wanted to do that, they should have a
  lawyer write the thing, which makes scurrying _today_ to find a lawyer and
  get the thing done.  Of course, that lawyer might also say that opposing
  the motion for a TRO is not the best strategy, in which case it shouldn't
  be done.
- If you go to the courthouse and find the CCA rep, and identify yourself as
  a defendant in the action, he or she is obliged to serve you with a copy
  of the complaint (but would probably want your name, address, and telephone
  number).

I haven't been able to figure out yet when or how one can file an amicus
brief.  I've always wanted to do that.

-- 
Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org>  | And do not say, I will study when I
Temp.  http://www.loyalty.org/~schoen/  | have leisure; for perhaps you will
down:  http://www.loyalty.org/   (CAF)  | not have leisure.  -- Pirke Avot 2:5




More information about the linux-elitists mailing list