On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, R. A. Hettinga wrote:

> I think Gilmore's right.
> On the other hand, and, quite frankly, it is the *market* that
> ultimately determines the salability of something, and not government
> regulation, or even the litigiousness of the recording industry.
> I think the reason we don't have digital out jacks on minidisc
> players is because people don't want to *pay* for them. The fact that
> the recording industry's lawyers have a massive incentive to increase
> that cost as much as they possibly can, is, oddly, orthogonal to the
> basic value proposition that people *play* music on the things, and
> not record it on them.

I have a hard time believing this.

How much would digital out jacks cost?  $1? $2? $5?

If the manufacturers thought they could do it, they would.  We live in a
land where every marketing department is trying to outdo every other.

I think the only reason that they don't is that they know what would
happen if they did.

That price they are not willing to pay. Why sink a bunch of money into a
product line just to see all that time and inventory destroyed by
overactive lawyers declaring it a "tool for copyright violation".

The market has nothing to do with the situation.  This is a case where no
one wants to be the first to stand up and get their corporate heads blown

[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.
    "In the future, everything will have its 15 minutes of blame."

Reply via email to