[2995] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
E-mail List Created to Discuss Whether Software is Speech
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Junger v. Daley Announcements)
Sat Jul 18 18:01:53 1998
To: jvd-announce@samsara.law.cwru.edu
cc: junger@samsara.law.cwru.edu
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 11:52:15 -0300
From: "Junger v. Daley Announcements" <jvd@samsara.law.cwru.edu>
Ruling That Software Publishers Are Not Protected by First Amendment
Sparks Interest on the Internet
SoftSpeech Electronic Discussion List Created to Discuss Issues Raised
by Decision in Junger v. Daley
Software Authors Puzzled by Judge Gwin's Ruling That Their Writings
Are Devices ``Like Embedded Circuitry in a Telephone''
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland, Ohio, Wednesday, July 18, 1998
For Immediate Release
For More Information Contact:
Peter D. Junger (216) 368-2535
<junger@samsara.law.cwru.edu>
Raymond Vasvari (216) 662-1780
<freespeech@mail.multiverse.com>
Or see URL: http://samsara.law.cwru.edu/comp_law/jvd/
To be added to, or removed from, the list of those who were sent this
press release, please send e-mail to <lawsuit@upaya.multiverse.com>.
_________________________________________________________________
Cleveland, Ohio, July 18 --
The decision on July 3 by Federal District Court Judge Gwin in the
case of Junger v. Daley that computer programs and source code are not
constitutionally protected speech because, though written in a
language, they are ``inherently functional'', has inspired extensive
dissent by programmers and computer scientists on the Internet. Judge
Gwin's holding that ``while a recipe provides instructions to a cook,
source code is a device, like embedded circuitry in a telephone, that
actually does the function'' appears to have been particularly
inflammatory.
Because the decision has inspired so much interest, a new electronic
discussion list known as ``SoftSpeech'' has been established as a
forum in which programmers, computer scientists, and lawyers---and
anyone else who is interested---can discuss whether software should be
protected as speech. Related issues raised by Judge Gwin's decision
may also be discussed on the SoftSpeech list: for example, the
question---which has already been raised in Internet discussions---as
to whether the classification of software as functional devices means
that software publishers are not entitled to the protection of the
copyright laws.
A World Wide Web site has also been established to support the
SoftSpeech discussion list. It can be accessed at
<http://samsara.law.cwru.edu/~sftspch/> and contains information on
how to subscribe to the SoftSpeech list as well as links to the
relevant cases and other background material.
The address of the SoftSpeech list is
<softspeech@samsara.law.cwru.edu>. To subscribe, send an e-mail
message to majordomo@samsara.law.cwru.edu containing the command
``subscribe softspeech'' (without the quotation marks) in the body of
the message.
Programmers and computer scientists often have only a vague
understanding of how the law actually functions. Judge Gwin's
opinion, on the other hand, is striking evidence that the courts and
lawyers often lack even a minimal understanding of computer
programming. Since the most important legal issues at the start of
the next millenium will frequently involve the status and regulation
of computer software, and since legal decisions like that of Judge
Gwin's can inhibit---or, in other cases, encourage---the development
of the software needed in the comming age, it is essential that the
gap in understanding between lawyers and computer professionals be
bridged. The SoftSpeech list has been created in order to encourage
the building of those bridges.
Another consequence of the interest in Judge Gwin's decision has been
that that several persons have inquired as to whether there is a
litigation fund to support the work of the plaintiff's attorneys in
Junger v. Daley.
There is such a fund.
Contributions may be sent to Professor Spencer Neth, Case Western
Reserve University Law School, Cleveland, OH 44106. Checks should bear
the notation ``Junger Litigation Fund''.
-30-
