Jim Tyre writes: "Judge Kaplan's ruling is out." The actual judgment is a separate document. Note that the judgment forbids Defendants and anyone acting in concert with them from posting or linking to the DeCSS code.Update: 08/17 07:57 PM by H :Taken from an earlier post: The ruling is availible online. The New York Times has a concise statement concering the case - essentially, the judge rejected the arguement that computer code counts as free speech, and therefore should be protected by the First Amendment. However, it should be noted that this ruling was *expected* by the 2600 folks, as Martin Garbus, one of the lawyers noted. (Garbus, it should be noted, has been before the Supreme Court /19/ times). This will mean that the Appeal will go higher, and that means that if/when the judgement is overturned, it will affect more than just NY, as this would have.
A quote from the conclusion:
In the final analysis, the dispute between these parties is simply put if not necessarily simply resolved.
Plaintiffs have invested huge sums over the years in producing motion pictures in reliance upon a legal framework that, through the law of copyright, has ensured that they will have the exclusive right to copy and distribute those motion pictures for economic gain. They contend that the advent of new technology should not alter this long established structure.
Defendants, on the other hand, are adherents of a movement that believes that information should be available without charge to anyone clever enough to break into the computer systems or data storage media in which it is located. Less radically, they have raised a legitimate concern about the possible impact on traditional fair use of access control measures in the digital era.
Each side is entitled to its views. In our society, however, clashes of competing interests like this are resolved by Congress. For now, at least, Congress has resolved this clash in the DMCA and in plaintiffs? favor. Given the peculiar characteristics of computer programs for circumventing encryption and other access control measures, the DMCA as applied to posting and linking here does not contravene the First Amendment. Accordingly, plaintiffs are entitled to appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief.
Dated: August 17, 2000