What else to say?

Johno Johno
Posted by Johno Johno on   |   § 3

§ 3 Comments

1

I think the software company might have relented because they realized that they would have lost, because no one would interpret the DMCA so broadly as to cover *complete morons* who thought that copy protection means relying on Windows' Autorun feature. They should go out of business for shame of stupidity alone.

MuffinMan MuffinMan

2

Looking a little deeper, I think there is something insidious about a company that _installs a device driver_ through stealth...that is what this technology does. That device driver sits there screwing with anything your CD ROM drive does, from then on...making sure you don't do anything it thinks is questionable.

The real crime, from my standpoint, is that for some reason it is legal for these bozos to install this stuff. I have no idea why. Where is the basic consumer protection legislation that prevents companies from doing this kind of crap?

If the RIAA really doesn't want people copying what it does, it can go ahead and start selling stupid devices that play fixed music. They can integrate their software and their hardware.

In the mean time, general computation rights are being savaged in the name of protecting the bottom line of bottom-feeding companies.

Ross Ross

[ You're too late, comments are closed ]