[GRLUG] NOT Linux

[Scott Huffman]

On Dec 11, 2007 9:10 AM, Scott Huffman <sjhuffman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Dec 11, 2007 7:10 AM, eah <darth_linux at ameritech.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday 11 December 2007 05:38:14 am Bob Kline wrote:
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7136069.stm
> > >
> > > I'm not sure exactly what's being
> > > done here here, but do know that
> > > the RIAA and the MPAA would
> > > dearly love to control people's
> > > computer's so that nothing can be
> > > stored on people's personal hard
> > > drives that those monopolies don't
> > > approve of.
> > >
> > > **
> > > Western Digital has blocked users from sharing more than 30 different file
> > > types, if they are using the company's software, called Anywhere Access.
> > > **
> > >
> > > People like Orin Hatch, R-UT,  point man
> > > for the MPAA and the RIAA,  contemptuously
> > > claimed that if people didn't heed the wishes
> > > of those monopoly groups their PCs would
> > > be rendered useless.  Never mind that he didn't
> > > know what he was talking about - the intent
> > > is clear enough.
> > >
> > > The question is whether a company like WD
> > > will try to implement a hardware solution -
> > > something that looks for a code in a file?
> > >
> > > I doubt the industry will stop looking for a
> > > way to prevent people from storing things
> > > on their PCs that it doesn't like.  Failing that,
> > > it will continue to keep suing everyone in
> > > sight,  but I suspect it would prefer PC control.
> > >
> > >      -Bob
> >
> > and it's the blanket policies of "that file type/protocol is used for illegal
> > sharing" that makes computing less useful. If they had their way, the
> > Internet would revert back to nothing but plaintext, information-only,
> > no-attachments-allowed and e-commerce would die.
> >
> > sorry, that's a hot button for me :-)
> >
> > eah
> > _______________________________________________
> > grlug mailing list
> > grlug at grlug.org
> > http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug
> >
>
> This is pretty ridiculous.  Content providers like record companies
> and movie studios etc would have to add that to their terms and
> conditions.  And who's to say that the mp3's I'm sharing with my
> family aren't just home-recorded songs?  DRM is a horrible way to
> police restricted content.  If they had gotten on the ball earlier
> with digital music and video, I doubt "illegal filesharing" would be
> such an issue.
>
> ~S
>

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/12/riaa-files-supplemental-brief-in.html

There's another example of the industry creeping on things like
authorized copies.