|
|
Posted by Doug Jacobs on 10/05/06 18:20
In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Technobarbarian <Technobarbarian-ztopzpam@gmail.com> wrote:
> > How about my right to actually USE the media I bought?
> If the license doesn't allow you to use the damn thing don't buy it.
> How hard is that? Your rights haven't changed. As the technology changes the
> licenses you buy are changing.
The problem is that these licenses are begining to infringe on local and
federal laws. Furthermore, many times, you can't even read the license
until you've open the package, or tried to install the thing. Many stores
won't accept returns on opened music or software. Even though the license
says you are entitled to your money back, the license is between you and
the company - not the store.
> > How about my right to privacy?
> If someone forced you to put this stuff on your machine you might have a
> point. If you make an agreement to give up privacy rights it's a personal
> choice and not a loss of rights.
Read about Sony's rootkit incident.
This was software that was installed on machines without the users'
knowledge or permission. As such, this actually violates some fledging
laws regarding computer privacy.
And as a special bonus, rootkit is very hard to remove fully, makes your
machine extremely unstable, AND also opened your computer to a number of
security exploits. All this, and you still aren't allowed to rip the CD -
which violates another federal law.
Oh yeah, and there was no indication on the package that the CD would
prevent you from ripping it, so people ended up trying to return what
they thought was a "defective" CD to stores - who only gave them an
exchange or store credit. Meanwhile, they unknowingly got to keep rootkit
free, as a "special gift" from Sony.
> > How about my rights regarding not having companies disable/destroy my
> > hardware?
> This is a nice red herring. If anything that incident confirmed and
> strengthened your rights.
Strengthened my rights!? Where is it written that I have the right to
allow software companies to secretly install other programs on my PC as
they see fit - and that these secret programs may decrease system
performance or functionality?
How about the CD copy protection scheme that would crash your computer?
How does this strengthen my rights?
Phillips actually sued over that one, claiming the music publisher could
not use the "Audio CD" trademarks on a CD that clearly was outside the
spec.
> > If the RIAA had its way, you'd have to _BUY_ different copies of music for
> > each and every different player you had in your house. No, you wouldn't
> > be allowed to make a copy of a CD for you to take in your car. No you
> > couldn't make personal mix-discs. No, you couldn't rip the CD to MP3 for
> > your MP3 player(s). No, you couldn't buy/sell used CDs. No, you couldn't
> > lend your music to a friend, or even play it on his equipment.
> And if you were stupid enough to buy this license you would deserve
> what you got.
And if it's the only game in town, are you willing to stop buying music
altogether?
> > Does that sound good to you? I hope so, because that's what DRM is
> > attempting to accomplish.
> How much DRM do you think I buy? Idiots who buy stuff they don't like
> deserve what they get.
You're assuming that the companies will disclose what DRM (if any) they
are including on their products. In many of the existing examples - there
is no disclosure on the front of the package! If the companies refuse to
give you the proper information in the first place, how can you be
expected to make an educated choice?
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|