[DMCA-Activists] Norwegian Appeals Court Orders Johansen Retrial

[Seth Johnson]

(Forwarded from Digital Copyright in Canada list)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: address@hidden Norwegian Appeals Court Orders Johansen Retrial (fwd)
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:31:33 -0500 (EST)
From: Russell McOrmond <address@hidden>
Reply-To: General Discussion <address@hidden>
To: General Copyright Discussions <address@hidden>


*sigh* 

---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
 Any 'hardware assist' for communications, whether it be eye-glasses, 
 VCR's, or personal computers, must be under the control of the citizen 
 and not a third party.   -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2003 02:48:17 -0800
From: Robin Gross <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Subject: Norwegian Appeals Court Orders Johansen Retrial

IP Justice Media Release
March 3, 2003

Contact:  Robin Gross, Executive Director, IP 
Justice  address@hidden  +1 415.863.5459
              Halvor Manshaus, Attorney, Advokatfirmaet Schjødt 
AS,  address@hidden   + 47 22 01 88 00


Norwegian Appeals Court Orders Johansen Retrial

Hollywood Pushes to Outlaw Competing DVD Player Software

Oslo - Norwegian teen Jon Johansen faces a retrial after an appeals
court  in Norway agreed to rehear the case on February 28, 2003.  
Johansen is  known internationally as “DVD-Jon” for his role in creating
DeCSS DVD  decoding software.

On a complaint filed by Hollywood movie studios in 2002, Johansen was 
charged under a Norwegian data theft law for trying to build DVD
playing  software.  Hollywood lawyers and Norwegian prosecutors claim
that because  Johansen tried to watch his own DVD movies on equipment
outside of  Hollywood’s control, the teen should be criminally
prosecuted for  unauthorized access to DVDs.

On January 7, 2003 a three-judge panel in Oslo’s city court cleared 
Johansen of all charges and ruled that people who try to watch their
own  DVDs on their own computers do not violate copyright or
anti-hacking laws,  since its their own property.  “The court finds that
someone who buys a DVD  film that has been legally produced has legal
access to the film,” the  ruling said.

Based on objections raised by prosecutors about the application of law
and  the presentation of evidence before the city court trial in
December 2002,  the Borgarting appeals court in Norway accepted the case
for a retrial to  begin in Summer 2003.

“If Johansen’s acquittal is over-turned on appeal, Hollywood will be 
granted unprecedented control over what people can do with their own 
property in the privacy of their own homes,” said Robin Gross,
Executive  Director of IP Justice, an international civil liberties
organization that  advocates for individual control over the private
viewing experience of DVD  movies.

If Johansen is convicted, it will become illegal for Norwegians to
bypass  DVD region code restrictions, fast-forward over commercials, or
otherwise  circumvent digital controls on their own property.  The 1998
Digital  Millennium Copyright Act already outlawed this type of
legitimate consumer  circumvention in the US, and numerous European
Union countries are  presently considering similar anti-circumvention
laws.

Brought under Norwegian criminal code section 145.2, which outlaws 
bypassing technological controls to access data one is not entitled to 
access, the charge carries a penalty of two years in prison.  This case 
marks the first time this law is used to prosecute a person for
accessing  his own property.  In the past, this data theft law outlawed
accessing  another person’s bank or phone records, or other data that
one has no  lawful right to access.

“This case is about more than freedom of speech and fair use rights,”
Robin  Gross said.  “If Johansen is found guilty, competition and
innovation will  also be harmed since people will be forbidden from
creating their own means  of watching their DVDs, and instead, will be
forced to purchase DVD players  with features that are controlled by
Hollywood’s movie studios,” said  Gross, an intellectual property
attorney.

According to Jon Johansen’s attorney in Oslo, "this appeal means we
will  have a full-scale retrial of the case in its entirety, witnesses
and all,”  said Halvor Manshaus.  “Johansen has carried the burden of
this prosecution  since he was only a minor, and the court’s full
acquittal from January of  this year has served to strengthen his
resolve. I am confident with regard  to the final outcome of the case -
in the end, a ruling from a higher level  court will give our arguments
a greater principle significance," Manshaus  said.

At the age of fifteen, Johansen assisted in the creation of DeCSS
software  that unlocks DVD movies in an effort to build a DVD player for
the Linux  operating system.  In 1999 Johansen first published DeCSS to
the “LiVID  List,” a team of Linux developers building open source DVD
playing  software.  From late 1999 – 2000 Hollywood movie studios filed
several  lawsuits in California, New York, and Connecticut to ban the
publication of  the computer code.

In 2000, a court in New York banned journalists at 2600 Magazine from 
publishing DeCSS or even hyper-linking to other websites that publish
the  computer code that is necessary for unlocking DVDs. That ruling was
upheld  by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in 2001.

Based on the free speech rights of web publishers, in November 2001 the 
California Court of Appeals lifted an earlier injunction against hundred
of  web publishers accused of trade secret misappropriation for
publishing  DeCSS.  Johansen has also been sued in this case, which is
currently  pending before the California Supreme Court.  The US Supreme
Court rejected  a petition to stay the injunction's lifting in January
2003.


More Information:
See IP Justice timeline of DeCSS litigation: 
http://www.ipjustice.org/decsstable.html
Jon Johansen's page: http://www.nanocrew.net/
Electronic Frontier Foundation Johansen Archive:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/DeCSS_prosecutions/Johansen_DeCSS_case/
Electronic Frontier Norway:  http://www.efn.no/
Jon Johansen's defense fund:  http://www.eff.org/support/jonfund.html
OKOKRIM: http://www.okokrim.no/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

IP Justice Media Release
March 3, 2003

Contact:  Robin Gross, Executive Director, IP Justice
                 address@hidden  +1 415.863.5459


Lexmark Wins Injunction Against Competitor’s Printer Toner Cartridges

Copyright Office Seeks Public Comment on Static Control’s Petition For 
Digital Copyright Law Exemption

Lexington - A federal judge in Kentucky issued a preliminary injunction 
banning Static Control Components from making printer toner cartridges
that  interoperate with printers sold by the second largest printer
manufacturer  in the US, Lexmark, a division of IBM.

In a case brought under the controversial US Digital Millennium
Copyright  Act (DMCA) last December, Lexmark claims that its
competitor’s lower priced  toner cartridges circumvent access controls
to the computer chip in the  Lexmark printer.  Calling them
“unauthorized replacement cartridges,”  Lexmark claims the computer
chips on Static Control’s cartridges are  circumvention devices,
outlawed by the DMCA.

On February 27, 2003, Judge Karl Forester agreed with Lexmark and
ordered  Static Control Components to stop selling the cartridges with
chips that  interoperate with Lexmark’s printers pending the outcome of
the  litigation.  "The court has no trouble accepting SCC's claim that
public  policy generally favors competition," wrote Judge Forester. 
"The court  finds, however, that this general principle only favors
legitimate  competition.  Public policy certainly does not support
copyright  infringement and violations of the DMCA in the name of
competition."

“This case clearly demonstrates how dangerous the DMCA’s overbroad 
circumvention prohibitions have become to competition and consumer
choice  in areas that nothing to do with preventing copyright
infringement,” said  Robin Gross, Executive Director of IP Justice, an
international civil  liberties organization that promotes balanced
intellectual property laws.

Gross called the court’s ruling “circular logic.”  “The court only
defines  what is ‘legitimate competition’ as competition that is
permitted by the  DMCA, without addressing the fundamental problem that
the DMCA outlaws  legitimate competition,” she said.  “The court’s broad
interpretation of  the DMCA would permit Ford to embed a computer chip
in automobile tires to  legally force consumers to purchase Ford tires,”
Gross said.

The US Copyright Office is currently seeking public comments on a
petition  filed by Static Control Components for an exemption to the
DMCA in order to  permit competition among manufacturers of printer
toner  cartridges.  Members of the public have until March 10, 2003 to
file  comments on Static Control’s petition via the Copyright Office’s
website.


More Information:
Static-Control’s Litigation Archive:
http://www.scc-inc.com/special/oemwarfare/lexmark_vs_scc.htm
US Copyright Office’s Online Form for Public Comment on Static Control’s 
Petition:
http://www.copyright.gov/1201/comment_forms/index.html
EFF DMCA Archive:
http://www.eff.org/IP/DMCA/


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

IP Justice is a grassroots membership based civil liberties
organization  that promotes balanced intellectual property law.  IP
Justice defends  individual rights to use digital media worldwide and is
a registered  California non-profit organization.  IP Justice was
founded in 2002 by  Robin Gross, who serves as its Executive Director. 
To learn more about IP  Justice, visit the website at
http://www.ipjustice.org.


IP JUSTICE
Robin D. Gross, Esq.
Executive Director     www.ipjustice.org
address@hidden    +1 415 863 5459

--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and links to other
related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca