Ryan Malayter wrote:
From Brian J. Beesley:
And then want to exercise their "fair usage" right to make copies for their own personal use. DRM has the effect of reducing this - the effect is to tie the license to one particular playback device. In addition the playback device sometimes has to be a specific brand e.g. iTunes content doesn't work (legally) except on genuine Apple iPods.
Again I say, so what? People buy DRM-protected music knowing the
restrictions going in. If you don't like the restrictions, DO NOT BUY
THE MEDIA. It's quite simple.
You have no inherent "right" to DRM-free music. And if studios choose
not to provide DRM-free music, you don't have to do business with them.
Fair use rights exist in some countries, but the studios have no
obligation whatsoever to make creating "personal backup copies" or
"time-shifting" easy for you. If those are really features consumers
demand, then DRM will ultimately fail in the marketplace if it can't be
loosened to accommodate those features.
But you don't have a right to infringe on copyrights just because you
dislike DRM.
While it's an interesting topic and I mean no offense to the parties of the conversation, could we take this topic over to Slashdot where it seems more appropriate? :-)
Thanks Eric
_______________________________________________ Prime mailing list [email protected] http://hogranch.com/mailman/listinfo/prime
