Your # 1 and # 2 seem likely to me. I'm not worried about your #3. I don't doubt that WalMart counted the possible cost of legal action before starting. While Microsoft and Sony and the others are big and have big pockets, there is an old popular suspicion of big corporations, and American voters have been known to cheer on the trust busters.
There hasn't been popular notice of the ever extended copyright laws, but there are millions who are unimpressed by the claims of the music moguls and their rented senators that they are victims of piracy by the masses. We have no sympathy for the sleazy shops that crank out counterfeit CDs by the thousands, but find it hard to understand why I shouldn't be able to buy a music CD and play it my computer while I spellcheck my fifth revision of a document. I like the idea of keeping the original of an expensive opera recording at home and playing a copy in my car while driving to Atlanta, and I think many agree that it should be fair use. I remember the days of software copy protection and its failure. Choppy At 06:07 AM 6/15/02 -0500, you wrote: >... > >3. WalMart sells 100,000 computers in the first year but Lindows goes >out of >business so everyone with a WalMart "borrows" a copy of W98SE and installs >in on their system. Microsoft sues Wal-Mart for "knowingly distributing a >device used to illegally copy software", Sony, Warner, BMG, EMI and >Universal sue WalMart for "selling a device used to distribute software used >to defeat copy protection on music CDs" (Magic Markers used by kiddies to >black-out the copy-protection track on the new CD's). Forced to fight a >battle on two fronts WalMart files Chapter-11. > > > >_______________________________________________ >General mailing list >[email protected] >http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
