On Thu, 07 Feb 2002, Steve Schear wrote: > Warner recently got smacked down by an Australian court for introducing > "two-tiered" titles: one for rental and one for sell-through. > > <http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,3392008%5e15391%5e%5enbv%5e,00.html> > > Outrageous excerpt: > In addition to claiming that a video on DVD is actually software, > rather than a movie, Warner tried to convince the court that simply > playing a DVD movie should be considered an act of "copying": > > "Warner said a person playing the DVD was actually making a copy of the film > because images and sound from DVD films were stored in the random access > memory (RAM) of a computer or a computer contained within a DVD player." > > steve >
You just gotta wonder: Is the difference between the "rental" and "sales" copies that you can't FF through the 10 minutes of commercials at the start of the disk? Or is it the other way around? What could possibly justify such a price differential ($24 vs. $55)? The RIAA weenies are gettin' awfully bold these days, even if no smarter. Cheers - Dr. Strangelove
