usatoday.com— XM Satellite Radio asked a federal judge Monday to throw out a copyright lawsuit by the recording industry over the company's new iPod-like device that can store up to 50 hours of music.
Jul 18, 2006View in Crawl 4
"...the difference is that current technology allows digital copies of the content..."On the flip side, if i made a less than perfect copy of something, it wouldn't be copyright infringement. So ripping cds to mp3 invalidates the copyright? Or re-encoding dvds at a lower bit-rate? Sorry, if making a lesser quality copy is considered no different than making a higher quality copy, then making a higher quality copy shouldn't be any different than making the lesser quality copy. Or put more simply: if the music industry treats lower quality MP3s (which is not an exact copy) the same as CDs, then how could exact digital copies be treated any different than imperfect analog copies?
I am so sick of this "Sirius caved in", "go XM", "people have been using cassettes for ages" nonsense. No they didn't, XM has been surpassed and we're talking about digital recordings after the passage of the DMCA. The DMCA hurt consumers and this is just another example. If you don't like the RIAA passing being able to do perform this kid of extortion, then get politically active. Don't just bitch about this on the Internet. Go out there and vote, canvas, rally and march if necessary! One vote may not amount to much, but history has proven that one voice CAN make a difference and that an IDEA can move mountains.
HA! I wonder if my state senator can even comprehend things like digital media, file sharing, or even the Internet? Without,of course, first asking his interns?? pfft ... voting
The RIAA (and, to a lesser degree, the MPAA, but mostly the RIAA) are extortionists who are suing innocent people and now companies that don't pay "protection" (from being sued) money? That's crazy! Limited DRM could work, but not the way the RIAA does it!
xenuxenutsJul 18, 2006
"...the difference is that current technology allows digital copies of the content..."On the flip side, if i made a less than perfect copy of something, it wouldn't be copyright infringement. So ripping cds to mp3 invalidates the copyright? Or re-encoding dvds at a lower bit-rate? Sorry, if making a lesser quality copy is considered no different than making a higher quality copy, then making a higher quality copy shouldn't be any different than making the lesser quality copy. Or put more simply: if the music industry treats lower quality MP3s (which is not an exact copy) the same as CDs, then how could exact digital copies be treated any different than imperfect analog copies?
Closed AccountJul 18, 2006
O&A
culbedaJul 18, 2006
I am so sick of this "Sirius caved in", "go XM", "people have been using cassettes for ages" nonsense. No they didn't, XM has been surpassed and we're talking about digital recordings after the passage of the DMCA. The DMCA hurt consumers and this is just another example. If you don't like the RIAA passing being able to do perform this kid of extortion, then get politically active. Don't just bitch about this on the Internet. Go out there and vote, canvas, rally and march if necessary! One vote may not amount to much, but history has proven that one voice CAN make a difference and that an IDEA can move mountains.
cerebralJul 18, 2006
Can you tell your last part to President Bush? He thinks that he can win a war vs. an IDEA :)
brino11Jul 20, 2006
HA! I wonder if my state senator can even comprehend things like digital media, file sharing, or even the Internet? Without,of course, first asking his interns?? pfft ... voting
tech42erJul 26, 2006
The RIAA (and, to a lesser degree, the MPAA, but mostly the RIAA) are extortionists who are suing innocent people and now companies that don't pay "protection" (from being sued) money? That's crazy! Limited DRM could work, but not the way the RIAA does it!