RIAA warns 204 P2P users

RIAA warns 204 P2P users
RIAA is preparing to launch its second wave of lawsuits very soon and has now sent out official warnings to 204 alleged P2P users, stating that they should either agree to settle their cases or get sued in near future.

RIAA launched its first wave of lawsuits in September, sueing 261 P2P users at that time. Now, RIAA has had some time to learn from its previous mistakes (that include sueing 12-year-olds, etc) and has propably raised the threshold a bit as well, focusing more on large-scale file sharers.



"In light of the comments we have heard, we want to go the extra mile and offer illegal file sharers an additional chance to work this out short of legal action," RIAA's president Cary Sharman said.

Letter that RIAA has sent to alleged P2P, simply reminds the recipients that "ignorance of the law is not a defense" and that destroying the MP3s from their HDDs would be considered as destroying the evidence, which is illegal as well. They also state that recipients should reply within 10 days or RIAA will proceed with legal actions.

Source: News.com

Written by: Petteri Pyyny @ 17 Oct 2003 17:02
Advertisement - News comments available below the ad
  • 40 comments

  • Dela

    ye ye, you keep going, just you keep going, you WILL be sorry when you sue the wrong person!

    http://www.BillLonero.com - Check out a true artists music!

    aD channel on IRC: rod.liquidirc.com #ad_buddies
    Newbie IRC Guide- http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/47221

    17.10.2003 17:40 #1

  • gee2223

    this people are stupied like they never download thing before . in my case i think some one can win a case against them stateing that the person my downloading from let them borrow the song is that a crime to borrow

    17.10.2003 19:11 #2

  • A_Klingon

    I just wish somebody would do another nice, tasteful, RIAA website hack like before, and provide lots of free workable mp3 links. :)

    17.10.2003 21:06 #3

  • vudoo

    Well believe it or not I see the RIAA getting more and more staff and suing the living snot out of everyone sharing music. What i ask myself and everyone else is is it worth your whole life savings over $10 per month you can pay to get Rhapsody? I know there are some artists missing but really I feel this is the only safe way becides es5 and that is a p2p program that will take you some time to get toons. We need to get it so that every artist and every song is available to Rhapsody customers NOW and then they have a right to complain about Downloaders. But until the pay services offer every artist and every song we should have the right to DL it on p2p till they get it on the pay service. Maybe when we subscribe to say Rhapsody we should have a license to Download what is not available on that service. If we get a warning we show the proof of our subscription to the service and all is well. This way it forces tyhe industry to get their shit together.

    18.10.2003 14:00 #4

  • rondack

    FUCK THE RIAA

    18.10.2003 15:43 #5

  • Nephilim

    "In light of the comments we have heard, we want to go the extra mile and offer illegal file sharers an additional chance to work this out short of legal action,"

    What this is is blatant extortion. They want you to settle for thousands of dollars or face them in court.

    Pay sites will never be able to compete with free p2p unless:

    1) They can match the selection of kazaa, including rare and out of print musc.

    2) There is no DRM. Nobody wants WMA junk.

    3) The price for a single mp3 is no more than .25 cents. Charging a dollar for a song or ten bucks for an album is a ripoff. They spend nothing on manufacturing or promotion for an mp3 yet they are charging for it.

    "What i ask myself and everyone else is is it worth your whole life savings over $10 per month you can pay to get Rhapsody?"

    Please, no offense vudoo, but this is EXACTLY what the RIAA wants people to think. That statement is the ultimate goal of the sue 'em all campaign. They are bullying the consumers into doing what they want. I wont stand for it.

    I never killed anybody that didn't deserve it.

    18.10.2003 15:53 #6

  • Otherone

    What I wanna know is HOW the hell do they know WHO is doing WHAT!!! There must be some general rules P2P people should know in order to protect their asses. Anybody know this?

    18.10.2003 16:12 #7

  • Otherone

    And another thing, I hate RIAA because they attack little guys in the USA, but are seemingly helpless against the people making BOOTLEG CD'S worldwide. The RIAA is ONLY interested in the money they get paid for screwing up peoples lives. There was a money niche and they filled it.

    18.10.2003 16:17 #8

  • Lockmstr

    Vuduu, you may be right. $10 dollars is nothing. But i'm sorry. Our civil rights are being violated here! It has always been legal to record songs off the radio and movies from TV or any other source. When I was in the military I recorded hundreds of albums on cassete and no one gave a crap then. p2p is no different. Borrowing from a friend and copying can not be legislated. Most of the people who are downloading would never have bought the songs anyway. I sure could never afford to buy all that I desired. Maybe the assholes should outlaw radio, TV and kareoke. Who's rights am I violating when I sing someones copyrighted song? My daughter is a user. after downloading if she really likes the song she goes out and buys it to listen in her car. If it wasn't for p2p she would have never known about the song in the 1st place. My cousin is a big user. he supports the music industry by buying tickets to just about every concert there is. Music is free. Packaging is not!

    18.10.2003 17:32 #9

  • Gern

    Back years ago, I used to be in law enforcement. I’ll never forget the day we had a group of RIAA people come talk to us about the “Heinous” crime of file swapping.

    I have met some over zealous officers in my life, but nothing compared to the goose stepping, swastika wearing, Nazi loving RIAA. I can honestly say that I was embarrassed to be even some what associated with them.

    These guys have absolutely no idea about shades of gray when dealing with people. To them it’s all black or white (suing a 12 year old is a classic example of RIAA enforcement techniques) Someone (namely a court) is going to have to tell them to stop, because I guaranty you, they would sue their own grandmother if that thought there was a way to make a buck out of it.

    The greed in Hollywood and the recording industry has no equal.

    18.10.2003 17:36 #10

  • Nephilim

    Otherone - the RIAA pays certain companies to scan p2p networks for copyrighted material. When this is found they use the " view user's shared folder" feature to see what else the person is offering. Then they download some of the songs to verify that the files are indeed mp3's. They record your IP then subpoena your ISP for your name, number, address. Once they have your info you get a letter saying in essence " Pay us several thousand dollars to make us go away or we will take you to court."

    There are things some people do to not be found, but as of yet nothing is foolproof except not sharing anything.

    I never killed anybody that didn't deserve it.

    18.10.2003 17:37 #11

  • nappyman

    Considering most cd's have 2 maybe 3 good songs on them, it is a wonder why people don't want to spend $15 plus dollars on a cd. Hence the need for p2p not only to get those "2 or 3" songs from your favorite singer but to find out about new artise who don't get hige media play. My answer to the record company and there effords to sue the small guy is "BOYCOTT THE RECORD INDUSTRY" IF EVERYONE IN THE U.S. STOPED BUYING CD'S FOR 90 DAYS OR MORE THEY WOULD GET THE MESSAGE. BOTTOM LINE, THEY NEED US MORE THAN WE NEED THEM. TOO HELL WITH THEM

    18.10.2003 18:11 #12

  • derhuntt7

    they don't know what u dl they know what u share. all they have to do is look through ur shared folder. that's all they need to see what we have or shared to screw us.

    18.10.2003 23:04 #13

  • derhuntt7

    they don't know what u dl they know what u share. all they have to do is look through ur shared folder. that's all they need to see what we have or shared to screw us.

    18.10.2003 23:05 #14

  • Otherone

    Interesting, maybe I put those songs in my shared folder because i copied them from my own CD and want have access to them from my computer or play on my MP3 player. So they are going to get me for making them available? Nobody knows where they came from. Seems pretty flimsy to me. Well, I'll go to jail before i pay any money, should i be "caught" with music on my computer! I have hundreds of records that I have backed up on CD and stored the songs on my computer. Record players wear out records and I find it is better to convert to MP3 and make my own CD to play anywhere.My Kazzaa Lite has an option to make it so nobody can see what all you have to share.

    18.10.2003 23:52 #15

  • JJBlizz

    Average price of a cd here in the u.k, about £14, which is $23, a lot more than I earn in a hour, for probably 1 or 2 songs I like, while the artists are making millions upon millions, I have to work to get by, so f**k record companies and everybody else.

    19.10.2003 05:51 #16

  • A_Klingon

    Gern - I think your comments hit the nail right on the head ! You are not exaggerating when you say the RIAA act like Nazis.

    And you're right, the unprecedented greed of both the RIAA and the MPAA knows no bounds, and is _very_ scary. Their coffers are a bottomless pit which they will never fill to their satisfaction.

    I absolutely agree that some official governmental body desperately needs to put a STOP to the RIAA's Nazi-like tactics, and order them to cease and desist in their draconian demands. But I fear there are too many corrupt individuals within too many governmental organizations who have vested interests (are being paid off) to have any worthwhile effect. (yet). Yes, it's a crying shame and a damn scary situation. The RIAA doesn't give a rat's ass for the well-being of their musicians except to the extent that it keeps the $$$ flowing into that bottomless pit of theirs.

    (I'd better get off this subject before I say something really inappropriate).

    But I agree with everything you said.


    19.10.2003 08:05 #17

  • aftrdawn

    A fair price for online music is flat $5/month rate for unlimited access including downloading and burning, this is the way customers and sellers might coexist, do not tell me $300M/month is not enough for them. Personally, I consider any music as a kind of noise, but I would not give a f**k to RIAA assholes.

    19.10.2003 08:41 #18

  • XboxJunky

    Pretty soon i think someone is gonna get fed up with all of this extortion, money grubbing, goose stepping, all of it, and they are gonna counter sue the RIAA, and its gonna go to the supreme court, and this will be a mile marker in MP3 history, I cant wait until this happens.

    19.10.2003 09:55 #19

  • vudoo

    On and on Reakless abandoned. Somethethings wrong this is going to shock them. Nothing to hold on to and break the truth with more bad news. They left us scars size EXTRA LARGE!! That is what the RIAA has done to us and the entire music industry has done. Yea that song was from Blink 182 and there is so much truth to the chorus. I live the song as a Blind man society has treated me like shit and now another reason to take my anger out on someone and it may as well be the RIAA. Nephilim I agree with what you've said many times over. However Rhapsody has tons of rare stuff and older stuff and new alternative and Hard stuff like Blink 182 in which I'm listening to on Rhapsody. And if it were not for p2p I would have not heard of these bands in the first place. Music should only be $10 per month and unlimited access to it as long as you subscribe. I don't really like DRM it is a bad idea. Yes the RIAA is taking our rights away but at the same time the artists rights are violated by the RIAA every time they sign up with an RIAA sponsored record label. Laws need to change to the better benefit of the consummer and the Government needs to stop thinking in terms of poor poor record labels like BMG, RCA, MCA and all the others. These boys are liars that is what they are paid to do is lie. I was a telemarketer and really all of the propaganda is just like Telemarketing on a large scale. Yes Rhapsody is great but the bait and switch tactics of the RIAA need to be investigated. Now Kazaa was taken over in hostile efforts by the RIAA. It too is just like the new Napster and I believe that some of the lawsuits made by the RIAA was the fact that the makers of Kazaa sold out to the RIAA and is narking on its users. I've read articles on oter p2p information sites that suggests that Kazaa is not as innocent as you might think and es5 is safe but I wonder how long it will be b4 they sell out as well. Remember p2p programs are a business and the developers weill look at what whill make them the most dollars with the least liability. I know this whole deal is complicated and really we are in the middle of the companies trying to make the most money from what was discovered by a 19 year old kid who had the smarts to develope something that would change the way we all deal with Music. Yes I too have been borrowing and sharing music with my friends. DRM or not there will always be a way to record the music to your Hard Drive and burn at will. Even Rhapsody can be recorded 100% perfactly without loss. This is why they'll never get that .79 cents they want per song. They are better off with a flat rate NON DRM subscription modle with extra features you don't get with FREE p2p. They can compete but they need to get it together first.

    Voodoohippie

    19.10.2003 10:30 #20

  • rondack

    Big brave(MONEY CRUPPING RIAA) why don't they sue a few more 12 year olds and 80+ grandparents for $12,00 per song. Great public image!!!!

    19.10.2003 13:43 #21

  • Lockmstr

    Xboxjunky - it's not just about mp3's. It's about our basic American Civil Liberties and our freedom of expression. Vuduu - did you get permission before you quoted Blink 182? I see a lawsuit there! No one is gonna tell me what I can and cannot do with my stuff! The songs are mine. It don't matter if I came by it honestly or not. I have the right to sell it, give it away or destroy it. Imagine if detroit said we couldnt sell our autos without giving them a cut! I guess we should be forced to pay patent royalties on everything we own when shared, sold or given to someone else. If they don't want the songs distributed then they should have never released them in the 1st place. Mark my words people, Kareoke is the next target if these assholes get thier way!

    19.10.2003 14:20 #22

  • DarkmanX

    Can someone explain this to me? The whole argument that the RIAA has stated is p2p sites are infringing on copyright laws. I was under the impression that a person had to make a monetary profit, for there to be a copyright infringement. To use a famous quote, "any duplication of this game to (large audience) without the expressed permission of... is prohibited". Recording a football game on your VCR to watch on your tv is ok as long as you don't charge people to view the playback with you-hence your not making a profit. or going to the public library and recording audio tapes; on the now out dated, but then state of the art, double cassete recorder.

    Silent Assasin

    19.10.2003 14:53 #23

  • Lockmstr

    DarkmanX - The way I understand it, the so called infringement comes into play when someone makes a copy and then freely distributes it, thereby denying the publishers the opportunity to sell it to the same people.There is a very fine line here that is under debate. What RIAA doesn't get is that most of the downloaders would never have spent the money for the pretty packaging even if they couldnt get it elsewhere. Someone should take a poll to see what percentage of the population would actually spend their grocery/clothing or drug money to buy legit.

    19.10.2003 16:40 #24

  • vudoo

    The Mpaa was giving Best Buy a problem for selling DVD Xcopy Express aparently because my friend bought the last copy and Best Buy told them that they may pull it from the shelf because of the controversey about copyright. Heck we rent or buy the movie we have a right to make a copy for our own use. Becides it won't hurt the sales as long as people either rent or buy the DVD. Same goes for music. If we pay say $10 per month to a service or license agreement we should have the rights to copy it since the artists are in fact being paid even if it is not the billions they want. This is the compromise I think should happen. But when the FCC falls to the RIAA's demands and MPAA's demands and wants to put copy control devices inside our equipment that is where we should draw the line against all of the crap. Consummers should have alot more say then we do and at the same time artists and creaters need compensation but fair compensation and not big brother record or Movie promoters and trade groups taking it all away from them. p2p is the real answer and flat rate payments I think it would be cool to have a service for movies at a flat rate where we can stream or Download quality files without distortion. This can be a reality but we have to fight off the bad guys at the RIAA/MPAA first. People are willing to pay but not per Movie/Song.

    Voodoohippie

    19.10.2003 20:03 #25

  • ibstud

    are only people who live in the united states being sued by the riaa? I haven't heard of any court in another country going along with this yet. Has there been one yet?

    19.10.2003 20:38 #26

  • rondack

    My last post should read MONEY GRUBBING RIAA.

    20.10.2003 02:16 #27

  • acidod

    This will all be over one day...Just like when all the Boy bands were the current "thing." Thank god life goes in cycles, can you imagine what the next major fiasco will be?????

    20.10.2003 07:31 #28

  • GrayArea

    Quote from Lockmstr> "It has always been legal to record songs off the radio and movies from TV or any other source."

    The entertainment industry is trying to make recording broadcast digital television illegal right now. Read the article on the home page of this site.

    "FCC considers "broadcast flag" and its requirements"

    We mustn't lower ourselves to the level of those we loathe, lest we become loathsome ourselves.

    20.10.2003 08:08 #29

  • rondack

    I don't plan on buying any CD's until the RIAA knocks off their terrorist bullshit.

    20.10.2003 08:41 #30

  • darthnip

    this is really no different that a few other things going on in the USA. You can walk into any sporting goods store and buy a high powered hunting rifle or handgun with no problem. but when peopl get killed by guuns, they blame the gun and try to make tougher gun laws or even outlaw handguns alltogether. you can walk into the local gas station and buy a pack of zigzag rolling papers with no problem, but if you get pulled over leaving the gas station and the cop see's the zigzag'z in your car, you could get arrested for posession of drug paraphenalia!! 25 years ago if you were recording someone else's music and selling it then yes, you should have been busted. but technology has evolved and so have we, the laws should change with us. if you are downloading ful albums and selling them to everyone, then yes you should get in trouble because you are stealing from the artists that made that music. but if you download a full cd to see if you want to go spend your hard-earned money on it, that should be fine. the record labels should really understand that downloading music actually generates alot of sales for them. not all people know how or where to go to get any cd they want in under a minute, they're stuck sifting thru a bunch of p2p crap trying to find 1 song, which that alone appears to me to be some small form of punishment for what they are doing. they need to let it go, it will never stop. i hope to someday see a summit of all the world's l337 peeps coming together and posing a proposition to the RIAA nazi regime, either you stop it and just back off, or we'll stop you, your choice. I mean come on, there are people being murdered every day, babies being dropped off in dumpsters, terrorists all over the place, and we have the balls to actually dump money into such a futile effort like stopping people from downloading?? thats crazy!!! if they ever do stop it, I'm sure a group of friends can just get togetehr and chip in $1 and go buy the cd and rip off copies for everyone that chipped in a dollar. then how will the record companies survive? It's clearly obvious they cant make a copy protection that cant be beat in a matter of minutes. give up already!!!

    I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.
    http://www.BillLonero.com - check out bill, he rocks and he's way cool.
    rod.Liquidirc.com #ad_buddies
    IRC guide - http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/47221


    20.10.2003 09:07 #31

  • GrayArea

    JJBlizz- Quote "while the artists are making millions upon millions,"

    VERY few artists are making "millions" off the music biz. The labels, publishing houses, their stockholders, and overpaid execs are the ones who are making the vast majority of the bucks.

    We mustn't lower ourselves to the level of those we loathe, lest we become loathsome ourselves.

    20.10.2003 10:22 #32

  • DarkmanX

    Lockmstr, good point on the distribution argument; but if that's the case, why sell vcr's with record capabilities, or even DVD recorders to record off of your tv signal. What's the dif between having satelite or cable and recording the movie from your satelite/ cable service? This seems like an obvious comparison that seems to not come up. Someone said that Blockbuster was taking DVD X Copy off of the floor for copyright issues, yet they'll sell you a dvd recorder and instruct on how to hook it up if you have cable or satelite to record your favorite tv shows, or dare I say...movies. What's that about?

    Silent Assasin

    20.10.2003 15:08 #33

  • Elayne

    I live in the US, and the hole country is going to hell in a hand basket. I am so fed up with the lying, greedy big business and the government. I will never pay for another cd. It's bad enough to work like a dog and all my tax money goes to Iraq instead of cleaning up America. I don't see where the RIAA has any right going into my computer to search my files. What I have on my computer is my business and I can delete anything I want. Who the heck are these people to say that I am destroying evidence? Can't something be done on that? To pay a p2p for downloading songs, I've downloaded many that were incomplete. As they say, only in America. Woe is me!!

    21.10.2003 19:13 #34

  • vudoo

    A solution that is even simpler is to simply tax or have a portion of our money that went to the DVD burner we just bought or DVD/PVR or whatever records to go to a artist fund. There should be NO copy protection or control of what we copy. If we pay for the right when we buy the device then there should be no debate about it at all and all of the lawsuits against companies can come to an end. Yes people will defeat any copy protection scheme you can throw at us but if we simply make a compromise then we all can go on with life and enjoy what we love the best and that is our Audio/Video systems without limits. But behind the scene the MPAA/RIAA is trying desperately to own both the media and the technology that plays the media. This should be an anti trust demonstration if I ever heard of it. The laws need to be changed and we all need to be signing petitions and writing to our legislatures about the unfair behavior and get our fair use laws back into the game.

    Voodoohippie

    22.10.2003 10:06 #35

  • Toiletman

    *sigh* **** the RIAA. As always.

    When you are on your deathbed, you will wonder, "Did I waste my life? Was it worth spending all that time on that?" Do not despair, no one has wasted their life. After all, you can only waste something if you throw it away. And you can't throw life away.

    22.10.2003 16:18 #36

  • Otherone

    Vudoo: I don't know if taxing the burners is right either. We'll pay more for burners even if not used for copy. So now the artists should get a chunk of the cd-dvd player/burner business? Bet that goes over real big with the companies that make them. Prolly more money there than music itself!
    We need to focus on the issue which is not really who gets the money, but rather nobody gets the money because we have the rights to do what we want so long as it is not sold. Period. If you want your own copy of the precious little CD, then fine, go buy one!
    As far as buying a new CD, forget that. I like the OLD stuff anyway and all the new stuff sounds like ****! I've downloaded almost a thousand songs by now, plus the records and CD's I already have is another thousand. But who's to say I did not record them straight from the radio and convert them to MP3? How dare I backup my worn out old records that can't be replaced. You know how many CD's can't even be found anymore? Oh, but I can't copy from a CD or what, go to jail. I record all my records to CD, but that is OK?
    No, these a++holes just don't like the idea that the internet and fast computers have made it so much more easy & efficient to obtain music and no money fills their greedy pockets and they use the copyright infringement bs to scare the hell out of everyone (but not us of course).
    And since when did it go from not selling it was OK to now you can't even have it?

    22.10.2003 18:00 #37

  • vudoo

    OK this makes sense what you're saying but OK maybe this should happen instead. maybe DVD burners should come with DVD Xcopy Express sold with the burner. You pay $65 regular price for the copy software plus a copy Tax or License to copy Tax. Buy a burner WITHOUT DVD Xcopy Express and pay no tax. DVD Xcopy would not be available WITHOUT buying a NEW DVD burner or you have to purchase a license from the FCC similar to a CB radio license when you had to purchase the right to operate a CB Radio before they made that FREE. The license should be say $5 or $10 and last say 5 years or so. Then your copy of DVD Xcopy would stop running till you buy another license from the FCC and then you have to activate your DVD Xcopy with the FCC to prove you purchased your license. CD burners same way. You buy Nero and you have the same rights with your Right To Copy License or (RTCL). There should be no debate about all that and you can copy copy copy to your hearts content so long as you buy your license just like you buy a hunting license or fishing license and don't complain about that and if you enjoy the sport of copying then well it may be worth it.

    Don't get me wrong I am not playing defil's advocate but I am just trying to post a reasonible compromise that lawmakers may read and say Hey Voodoohippie has a good idea instead of doing away with the citizens right to make digital copies we'll just make them purchase a license and the money goes to support the artists we copy. No harm will be done and fair will be fair all accross the board. I know that some people would try and crack the software but many people would just get a license and be happy. Maybe if you say subscribe to Rhapsody for 1 yr you get a FREE RTCL (Right To Copy License) and it lasts for 2 years. For every 1 year you pay for a legal service you get more time added to your license. The RTCL would also include p2p rights. Buy a copy of Kazaa at Best Buy and get a RTCL inside of Kazaa in which you fill out like a CB Radio license and mail it to the FCC. Now I know I will probably get flamed but please remember I did not turn against my friends in the underground sector. I am just trying to make it so we don't need an underground sector of the net to begin with.

    Voodoohippie

    22.10.2003 19:14 #38

  • Otherone

    No flame intended, just kicking tires.
    A nice idea but.... what happens when my license expires? I if my "license" expires, does all my music delete itself or become diabled? It would be hard to prove what was downloaded or what.
    We CAN pay them, but still people will copy or share at will no matter what. There is nothing that can be done about it. They want to stop the SHARING altogether. They cannot stop it. Resistance is futile! We will always find a way.
    The license sounds OK, but I will never get one, I'll just keep copying away and dutifully perpetuating what the RIAA hates the most. You know this is getting more and more like FAHRENHEIT 451.
    There are many other ways to copy DVD using all kinds of freeware. There are millions of burners already that don't have restrictions, mine for one.
    That other guy was right when he said they will crucify the wrong person and bam! But they know it is a numbers game. If they keep it up, enough people will start paying services big bucks to play it safe. They can't stop the sharing, but they will bring in $billions$ one way or another.
    The music offered for a fee is at least clean and bug free. So paying should be an option. People have actually paid for songs that self destruct after so many playings! If they will pay for self destructing music, they will pay for anything.
    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    23.10.2003 00:20 #39

  • vudoo

    No my proposal would not delete your already copied fies but stop you from Downloading anything or lock up the copy software till you get your license renewed via Visa, Master, or sending a check to the Federal Communications Commission in Washington DC. Then they give you a activation code and your copy software is good for another 5 years. This includes all copy protection schemes and the like. Again it would also license you to p2p software built with a license checking system that checks with the FCC data base to make sure you have a valid license. This way the artist would be paid directly with a portion of the money you paid for your license. So if I Download The Lemonheads from kazaa or a p2p program with the FCC license check The Lemonheads get a portion of the funds from the artist fund at the end of the year/month which ever the government would decide upon. Again everyone wins and everything would have a FCC license check built into the device like say a DVD recorder, Tivo, anything that records. When you buy a device you have the option to buy the RTCL and your activation code would be given to you at the store with a scratch off card with the code hidden underneath. The clerk would activate your RTCL by swiping the card through a scanner so even they don't have the RTCL code. or better yet each device would make you swipe your RTCL card. This way even if Microsoft does make the DRM you don't loose your right to copy anything at all period. The government is going to take your rights away if no reasonable compromise is met so now is the time to put heads together and think of a way to make things work for the better of all who love what we use everyday.

    Voodoohippie

    23.10.2003 11:44 #40

© 2024 AfterDawn Oy

Hosted by
Powered by UpCloud