Re: copyright under stress

On Wed, Jun 14, 2000, Robert Cumbow <rcumbow[_at_]grahamdunn.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2000, Lance Purple <lpurple[_at_]netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > _Worldwide Church of God vs Philadelphia Church of God_
>
> This is an instance in which, like many copyright owners, the
> plaintiff is seeking to block access to an (allegedly) infringing
> work. If a work is truly infringing, then of course it OUGHT to be
> enjoined. The issue under discussion, though, as I understood it,
> was whether copyright owners are misusing copyright in order to block
> public access to their own original copyrighted work.

Of course, if it is copyright infringement it is against the law and so the law is not being misused. Is that what you are saying? Now, how did you get to the last clause?

Okay, if you care to read the Microsoft 39-page appeal brief, you will see that Microsoft affirms that it would be denied its rights under copyright law if it allowed anyone access to to its copyrighted software. In other words, everything that is copyrighted by Microsoft is claimed a trade secret, and thus public access (or any other access except as licensed by Microsoft) must be denied.

It remains to be seen if the appeals court will buy that line of argument. But am I alone in believing that this makes no sense under copyright law, and that here copyright law is being used not only to deny public access (forever, not just for the copyright term), but also being used to protect trade secrets (as the DMCA is being used), and that Microsoft's rights to this denial are being claimed as a complete defense against a verdict of monopolistic anti-trust violations?

-- 
"Eric"  Eric Eldred  Eldritch Press
mailto:Eldred[_at_]EldritchPress.org
http://www.eldritchpress.org/EricEldred.vcf