For sure the vote will be said to not reflect public opinion, but 86%
saying there should be less DRM is quite a statistical majority.
I'm over the moon that "higher quality" is one of the future
intentions, I am tired of trying to listen to great songs that sound
like rubbish on any computer.... especially if I paid for them.
The future is getting brighter, once you all get to hear a recording
at 96Khz then you may understand, just like HDTV.
Can everyone stop dumbing down within the argument of "for the sake
of the license holders" now, in all spheres?
On 2 Apr 2007, at 13:42, Brian Butterworth wrote:
Just to keep Auntie on her toes, another company that is a TLA has
to not bother with wasteful DRM:
'In a major change of policy for a record label, EMI is expected to
later today that it will begin selling songs without copy
Apple's iTunes music store.
Apple's chief executive, Steve Jobs, will attend a press conference
alongside Eric Nicoli, his counterpart at EMI, in London at 1pm today.
According to reports over the weekend, they will announce that EMI is
ditching the anti-piracy technology that currently restricts how
copy and listen to their digital music tracks.
The Wall Street Journal reported today that the group will announce
plans to sell significant amounts of its catalogue without anti-
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.24/742 - Release Date:
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/
mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
Unofficial list archive: http://email@example.com/