Update on California DeCSS republishing case

An ongoing battle in California dealing with the Brunner case filed in 1999 for the republishing or distribution of the DeCSS code on the Internet, is taking another step. The DVD CCA is making a move for dismissal in the case that would extend the decision outside the state of California boundaries.

The DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA) is a
not-for-profit corporation with responsibility for licensing CSS (Content
Scramble System) to manufacturers of DVD hardware, discs and related products.
Licensees include the owners and manufacturers of the content of DVD discs;
creators of encryption engines, hardware and software decrypters; and
manufacturers of DVD Players and DVD-ROM drives.

Obviously, this has enormous implications in a situation where companies have been sued for printing the code on a T-shirt and has far reaching arms that have touched even those living in England. According to this story at Ziff-Davis, the act of filing a motion for
dismissal points to a likelyhood of success. 

In a move that has big implications for both the distribution and sharing of entertainment content and freedom of speech online, a group of entertainment and technology companies called DVD CCA filed on Thursday for dismissal of a key lawsuit pertaining to descrambling movie content on DVDs. The lawsuit had been brought in 1999 against Andrew Bunner, who obtained the code for a DVD decryption program called DeCSS and published it online, plus 21 other named defendants, and 500 other unnamed defendants. The legal proceedings have been going on in the California court system, and the motion for dismissal filed on Thursday points toward the probability of a dismissal. Previously, because some of the defendants in the case were not based in California, the California Supreme Court issued a ruling restricting the legal pursuit of DeCSS republishers outside of California. At least one person being pursued legally was in England. "DVD CCA had been casting a very wide net," says Gwen Hinze, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which had been involved in defending Mr. Bunner. Indeed, the importance of the issues pertaining to movie distribution and DVD technology in the case was matched by the significance of free speech issues online related to the case.

This case if dismissed, is by no means giving a green
light to copying a copyrighted movie. It only means the DeCSS code is not a
trade secret and can be published. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has argued
all along that the DeCSS has been out of the bag for some time. They felt that
the trade secret law was being misused as an attempt to stop it's spread. Their
issue with the situation was whether trade secret laws should impact or
restrict free speech rights. Mr. Brunner is not the only one that will
benefit from the dismissal if it should occur.

Source: Yahoo!