[LaughingVulcan]

Originally Posted by nerys

That is a risk I take and I understand this. Just like so many people in history who took similar risk (MUCH greater risks than I take) for what they KNOW is right and for what "the people" wish to impose on you with there will. In the end they usually win (there cause at least) because as with this case its almost always the MINORITY with the MAJORITY POWER trying to impose there will.

So long as you understand the "risk." But I lean towards libertarianism, so it's up to you to choose the manner of your destruction....

And sure, I have my own causes for which I would pledge my all. I believe that every person of integrity probably does. The DMCA ain't it for me, though.

EXPLAIN the DMCA in terms a lay person can understand and then go find me ONE normal american who things that law is legitimte. A law that says You can not mess with your own PROPERTY and make sure you convert it to terms that properly describe it. You may not change the wheels on your car unless there FROM the people who MADE the car no matter what they wish to charge or conditions they wish to impose. You may not let a friend drive your car OR drive on any roads the automaker does not approve of.

Indeed you cannot change the wheels on your car, if you replace them with Ben Hur style spikes that have a high probability of taking out another car's tires or cutting someone off at the shins. You can't even make your own tires out of wood and demand the dealer change to them before buying the car. If you don't like the price of the car or its tires - don't buy it. Or (something I've actually witnessed in ride-alongs with State Highway cops,) you cannot have light displays on your car which could be confused with emergency vehicle lights. You will be cited to have them removed, and if you are caught a second time without having done so your car may be impounded and you will walk home.

A law that says in the end if the manfacturer decides to STOP supporting your product and LITERALLY turns your property off YOUR NOT allowed to do ANYTHING ABOUT IT not even TALK about it with other people in text or verbally. Your ONLY option is to GO PAY AGAIN for what you already purchased.

Find me ONE normal citizen without a vested interest in such condition who will say Thats ok with me.

These laws have NOTHING to do with the will of the people. ONLY the will of a FEW with the money and power and you think I should just BOW down to them just because??

Colorfully put. Do you have to "bow down?" No. But you do have to obey the law and the law of the land, or you face correction.

An opposite hyperbole for you: I am doing 55 miles per hour in a 35 zone. I can tell that there is no danger, I have plenty of visibility and can react to any hazard with ample time. I get pulled over. Do I protest that the law is unmoral because it limits my freedom to go just however fast I want to in a safe manner? Do I point out that part of my fine is going to support a court which enforces the DMCA and therefore is unjust? Do I claim that the Constitution never gave the government the ability to limit my speed?

Hell, no. I pay the damn fine and thank God I wasn't charged with Criminal Reckless Driving. Unless I live in Montana.

(BTW, never been pulled over for doing 20 over - never done 20 over intentionally.... But have been pulled over for speeding. :O )

And there are plenty of unvested people who don't care about DMCA -- otherwise elected officials would find themselves unelected and would change the law.

I'm snipping your discussion about the constitution in this reply.

Commercial Publishers have no rights. None whatsoever. They do not even have a copyright right. They have a TEMPORARY Privilege granted by the government to foster a balance between OUR rights there rights and innovation. You clearly have no conception over the difference between corporate rights corporate privileges. You clearly have no conception of the ORIGINAL INTENT of copyright law.

The ORIGINAL INTENT of copyright law matters not in the slightest, unfortunately. What matters is what the law is. And I'd expect a good intellectual property lawyer to know that. I don't want my advocate to go hoping about what the law should have been - I want him to defend my interests according to what the law is.

But, even should it matter, the law respects that corporations are legal persons. It may be a fiction, or something you loathe or do not respect, but in no way shape or form does it not mean that a Corporation cannot exercise copyright. Or, more specifically, enforce its purchased rights from the author of a work. And, more practically, that a Corporation can indeed sue you in a court of law for damages done to it by the taking of its' copyrighted material and not paying for it.

Best still, if you feel like you can overturn the system and are that passionate: Run for office. That would be the true test of whether or not "the majority of the people" feel that the issue is important and needs to be changed.

Or just do as you will. As I said before, you will probably find out what is and is not enforceable in the law.