Relating how code can infringe on someone else's rights will be an abstract argument. When the process of harvesting on "free markets" is put in judgement, so will the harvest reached in an economy were an "invisible hand" rules. Perhaps both should be rightfully analyzed but which one first? David Stultz <ds932@bard.edu> wrote:
Just playing the Devil's Advocate here.
Are you allowed to go into a theatre and yell, "FIRE!!!" when there is none? Nope.
There *are* restrictions on speech. If MS's "speech" violated somebody's rights, that speech can be made illegal.
Dave
PS I agree that code is speech.
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, lizard wrote:
"Colin A. Reed" wrote:
I'll admit that the trial was fucked up from the start by the decision
to
center it around netscape rather than something more blatant like stac. Anyways, this has nothing to do with FC, unless you think that enterprise is fundamentally expressive and Microsoft's vicious suppression of competition has limited the ability of others to be heard.
But if source code is free speech, isn't a judge ordering some code be removed/edited/changed an intrustion on free speech? Isn't saying "Remove Explorer from the core install!" the same as saying "Remove this chapter from this book!"
Sure, the chapter can then be republished separately, but who is the judge to decide what elements of a work of speech belong together?
Code IS speech. And this has implications beyond DECSS and PGP.
____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1