Featured Articles

AMD SVP John Byrne named turnaround exec of the year

AMD SVP John Byrne named turnaround exec of the year

Director of AMD’s PR Chris Hook has tweeted and confirmed later in a conversation with Fudzilla that John Byrne, Senior Vice…

More...
Shield Tablet 8 launching on Tuesday July 22nd

Shield Tablet 8 launching on Tuesday July 22nd

We knew the date for a while but as of right now we can confirm that Nvidia’s new Shield Tablet 8,…

More...
AMD confirms 20nm in 2015

AMD confirms 20nm in 2015

Lisa Su, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, AMD, has confirmed what we told you back in May 2014 – …

More...
AMD reports loss, shares tumble

AMD reports loss, shares tumble

AMD’s debt load is causing huge problems for the chipmaker -- this quarter it had another substantial loss. The tame Apple Press…

More...
AMD A8-7600 Kaveri APU reviewed

AMD A8-7600 Kaveri APU reviewed

Today we'll take a closer look at AMD's A8-7600 APU Kaveri APU, more specifically we'll examine the GPU performance you can…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Thursday, 13 September 2007 08:07

U.S. Court of Appeals rules against DirecTV

Written by David Stellmack

Image

Exempts researchers and scientists


 

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against satellite television provider DirecTV by ruling that an exception must be made for security and computer science research that is conducted on satellite and smart card technology. 

The cases involved a provision of federal law that prohibits the "assembly" or "modification" of equipment designed to intercept satellite signals. DirecTV had filed legal action against hundreds of thousands of individuals and prosecuted them for illegally intercepting its satellite television signal because they had used smart card technology.  Since there are legal smart card technology uses and DirecTV did not make a distinction between legal and illegal usage, two of the individuals sued by DirecTV appealed the heavy handed legal tactics used by DirecTV.

DirecTV’s claim maintained that the federal law prohibition should apply to anyone working with equipment that is designed to intercept their signals, regardless of their intent or whether any actual interception occurred. Arguments were made on behalf of the individuals by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a non-profit foundation interested in protecting individual freedoms in electronic media under First Amendment and other Constitutional guarantees. 

EFF put forth the argument that the federal law should apply only to entities that make illegal interception possible by other people and should not apply to those who are merely curious about the equipment or are investigating its use for scientific purposes.

To read the full opinion from the 9th Circuit here.

Get more info on the case at the EFF web site here.

Last modified on Thursday, 13 September 2007 10:06

David Stellmack

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments