On 20 Mar 2001, at 13:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This has probably already been posted to the list by
> others, but as I get it in digest form, I can't say for
> sure.)
>
> http://slashdot.org/articles/01/03/17/1639250.shtml
>
> The numberin question is a 1401-digit probable prime.
> I've asked Phil Carmody whether it's been rigorously
> proven prime, or merely passed a strong probable-prime
> test.
I take it "illegal" means that the particular number contains a
representation in some form of language for a computer program that
does something which transgresses the law. In this case, cracks
DeCSS.
Could I point out that all computer programs and databases can be
represented as simply large integers, and that, if the representation
of this particular program were therefore illegal, I could claim
copyright of all existing and future software for all digitally
encoded systems since I can demonstrate a method of generating every
possible program, video, music track, ... simply by counting? The
best defence to my copyright claim might be that the expansion of pi
probably contains every possible finite length sequence of digits,
whatever rational base you care to use to make the expansion, and
that nobody "owns" pi.
Now I know the law's pretty darned silly, especially when it comes to
deep abstract concepts like this, but really I think that it's not
the integer itself which would be illegal, but its _deliberate_ use
as a mechanism to crack DeCSS. _If_ cracking DeCSS is indeed illegal.
IMHO DeCSS is so badly broken that its proponents might as well give
up now, but that's a different story.
Regards
Brian Beesley
_________________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
