Deane et al- About 6 months ago there was a quick blurb about a small imprint hiring a "security firm" to go after IPs they suspected shared their music. they had no proof other than the IPs having contacted a specific server that could have been contacted for legitimate reasons. The company (I don't recall it ever being named) essentially hacked into people's computer and then handed over everything found to the imprint, which then went to the law. Counter-suits had removed all possibility of everything found being used legally due to illegal acquisition (in some cases this means that the imprint screwed on going investigations of other types). T he article i read stated that the civil suits were tied up in courts and speculated they would stay there until dead. I realized then that buying new music CDs was bad because the DMCA is inherently flawed, and until fixed, makes for a wide range of things that should be illegal being tried, such as that. This SONY/BMG thing is just another example.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is inherently flawed because there are historical cases and precedent that prove buying a record or tape allows you to make copies for personally use. This was ok with CDs to. until the DMCA. My sister has one she used in her car CD player so much she complained there was issues. i could not recover three tracks when trying to make a new copy for her. this means people using car CD players, notorious for scratching the out edges and therefore a prime candidate for preventative measures of using copies, a legitimate reason to copy, cannot make the said copies. According to the DMCA if you buy a track in any form, you only have the right to it as brought. meaning one the mp3 is on your computer, you technically don't have the right to transfer ti to your Ipod without paying AGAIN!!!! and you cannot make a copy of the CD, nor rip from the CD for your Ipod or any other personal use, and has been used by the RIAA to go after people they have admitted they knew only did that, This is why i, and many others i know, and some artists in rock, are against the RIAA and want the DMCA fixed before it is used as an amendment to the copyright laws. Personally i feel this act by SONY/BMG only goes to prove that the DMCA is flawed since it is technically legal due to the DMCA while it would be illegal by other laws if the DMCA wasn't so over-protective. What i find most ridiculous is that a senator that has a recording contract and cant sing but thinks he i as country artist is the most vocal proponent. funny, last i checked that guy wasn't shared enough to make any lists let alone anything else. the guy himself needs to be removed from anything dealing with copyright due to conflict of interest. the entire thing is a farce and, imho only proves certain political views i have that have no business here and i will stop now to prevent going into them. Well, I hope I've brought up something that makes you think and look into the DMCA on your own, because this is likely the first of many snafus. -Josh _______________________________________________ ActivePerl mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe: http://listserv.ActiveState.com/mailman/mysubs
