Posted by Technobarbarian on 10/12/06 03:49

Ok, I've gotten completely bored with this thread for the simple reason
that none of you whiners seem to understand the word "rights". I do not know
how to make it any plainer. My interest in this subject is limited to one
issue: our rights. Do any of you fools know the meaning of the word? Do you
think rights just drop down from the sky and all of a sudden you have all of
these freakin' rights because you wish the world was organized that way.
Your fantasies do not interest me in the least. I am only interested in REAL
Freaking RIGHTS ----------------->RIGHTS<------------- not fantasies.

Now if my freakin' rights somehow magically changed how is it that the
way I use my music library has not changed?

"Doug Jacobs" <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
news:12iqoq6ctcs2oe9@corp.supernews.com...
> In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 Technobarbarian
> <Technobarbarian-ztopzpam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Read about Sony's rootkit incident.
>
>> Isolated incident - red herring
>
> It's a perfect example though.

No, it isn't. For the simple reason your that your *RIGHTS* did not
change. The legal system kicked in and worked as designed while your
*RIGHTS* were unchanged.


In order to exercise my rights to play the
> CD on my PC, I would have to have this software installed on my PC - with
> out my knowledge. Had Sony informed consumers up front what software was
> going to be installed and what its purpose was, those who still chose to
> install it would at least be making a conscious decision to do so.
>
>> > 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.
>
>> Exactly my point, your rights have not been reduced.
>
> Why, because Sony isn't the government? You are aware that private
> entities are perfectly capable of violating laws and private rights.
>
>> > 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.
>
>> Smart consumers learn from these experiences. The first time this
>> happens shame on them. The second time shame on you.
>
> So, if you're not reading all the latest tech news everyday, then shame on
> you? Sure, I'm a technology geek. I read the web, try to keep myself up
> to date on new technology and such, but I also think it's unreasonable to
> expect everyone else to do the same thing. What, you're going to tell
> your mother whose computer just got pwned due to the rootkit "Shame on you
> for not knowing about Sony's Rootkit, ma!"
>
> And even though I do try to keep current, I still think it's unreasonable
> that I even have to be AWARE of such things. Why do I have to know how to
> edit my Windows' Registry just so I can "fix" what other companies'
> products break? Why do I have to know how to scribble on the backs of CDs
> with a sharpie because some lame company thought it'd be keen if they
> tried to stop me from using the CD in an intended method?
>
> Do you agree that people should be allowed to use the technology without
> having to spend hours and hours poring over technical manuals and articles
> and such?

What in the world any of this whining has to do with your freakin'
rights changing completely escapes me. Are you claiming a right for
technology to be simple and easy for any fool to understand?

I drive a car. I don't know entirely how the car works, nor
> would I know how to fix it. That's why I take it to a mechanic. But by
> your argument, you think we should all become professional mechanics?
> That's completely unreasonable.
>
> Even today there's news about the latest ploy to try to make DVDs
> unplayable on computer DVD players. Sure, there's a hack already, but I
> find it more and more tiring that I have to continually fight this war
> against the stupid media companies just to use the license I legitimately
> purchased from them in the first place.
>
> Yeah, sure, there's always the ultimate option - just stop buying media
> altogether. At the rate things are going, that's looking more and more
> attractive.

No one holds a gun to your head and forces you to buy crap. Your rights
did not change. The technology changed. The licenses being sold changed.
Your freakin' rights remained the same.
>
>> > And if it's the only game in town, are you willing to stop buying music
>> > altogether?
>
>> I'm sorry. I assumed you live on planet Earth. Here we have LOTS of
>> choices. I can't speak for your planet.
>
> Other than not buying the product, what are these "choices" you speak of?
> If someone wanted a CD published by Sony, it's not as if they can go
> across the street to, say, Virgin and ask them to press you a copy.

Oh, you want a very specific and particular piece of crap. Well hell,
buy it, don't buy it, whatever. When in the hell did you get the right for
it to be sold with the license your little heart desires? You didn't. It's
Sony's property. They get to decide what to do with their property. It's
*their* right. If this changes they can whine about their rights changing.
Your ------------->RIGHTS<------------ have never included the right to do
whatever you want with Sony's property. You have never had the right to
demand the license you want.

>
> iTunes or something similar (but still legal)? You assume that the music
> in question is actually available. Not all of the publishers have
> embraced the online world.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
>
> So that leaves either illegal downloads or other forms of piracy. Not
> really an option, and, will just play into the hands of the RIAA and MPAA
> who claim it's because of piracy that publishers NEED to put more and more
> restrictive DRM on their products. It makes sense in a twisted way. They
> certainly can't do a whole lot to the folks who are pirating their work,
> but they can certainly make their legitimate customers suffer...oh
> yes...make them suffer a lot...
>
>> Easy, after the first purchase of this sort you have been educated.
>> Those who are too slow to learn their lesson are fair game.
>
> Again, you presume that the consumer has to basically become a technophile
> in order to learn about these things in the first place. Even then, the
> longer term effects of having Starforce on your machine took weeks, even
> months, to manifest. Even if you were a PC mechanic, the LAST thing
> you'd normally suspect is that game you deleted off your HDD last week...
>
> Yes, now we know. Fortunatly, I didn't lose any hardware to Starforce,
> but I know friends who did, not to mention the hours and hours they spent
> trying to fix their machine due to a problem that shouldn't have even
> occured in the first place.

As yet another whiner has yet to show anywhere that their actual rights
have changed I am done with this thread.<period>

You morons really need to get a clue. As long as you continue to whine
about non-existant rights no one in their right head is going to take you
seriously. When you get around to talking about the rights you want you
might be able to make a sane case you can sell, but I doubt it. There is a
ton of good music out there. These days even street musicians are selling
CDs. If you gotta have that heavily promoted crap sold by major corporations
you either have to buy what they're willing to sell, try to talk your
congress critters into giving you new rights or look at other channels. As
long as you continue to use your dollars to vote for crap you're going to
get crap.

TB

[Back to original message]