backtop


Print 62 comment(s) - last by LRonaldHubbs.. on Mar 10 at 7:50 PM


The RealNetworks verdict states that customers never have the right to make copies of content they legally own if they have to circumvent copy protection technology to do it.
Corporate piracy case was perhaps the highest profile scuffle since the fall of Napster

In September 2008 Seattle-based RealNetworks, a progressive media company founded by an ex-Microsoft executive, launched a new software product, RealDVD.  The seeming innocuous software was marketed under the premise of allowing you to make copies of content you legally own.  The catch?  Movie studios often don't want you to make copies of content you legally own so they oft put copy protections on the disc.  RealDVD was designed to circumvent those protections.  And that's where its trouble started.

In October 2008 a coalition of Hollywood plaintiffs filed suit against RealNetworks for promoting copyright infringement.  They argued the software would make it equally easy to make copies of content that users didn't legally own (such as movie rentals).   They also accused it of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a bill that prohibits circumventing copyright protection measures, such as copy protection technologies, even on content you own.  The studios also accused it of violating a contract with the DVD Copyright Control Association.

Last August, U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Patel sided with the Hollywood studios and found RealNetworks guilty of DCMA violations and breach of contract with the DVD CCA.  She ordered a preliminary injunction barring the sale of RealDVD.  In the statement she said that customers never have the right to make copies of content they legally own, if it's copy protected.

Now RealNetworks has finally settled the case, to the tune of $4.5M USD.  The settlement comes as RealNetworks was formulating an appeal of the judgment.  An additional provision of the settlement is that RealNetworks will no longer be allowed sell RealDVD.

The case was perhaps the biggest corporate piracy battle since the fall of Napster.  Daniel Mandil, chief content protection officer of the Motion Picture Assn. of America (MPAA) cheered the victory, stating, "We will continue to vigorously pursue companies that attempt to bring these illegal circumvention products and devices to market."

In total, only 2,700 people purchased the RealDVD software during its brief availability.

RealNetworks acting chief executive Bob Kimball comments, "We are pleased to put this litigation behind us.  I hope that in the future we can find mutually beneficial ways to use Real technology to bring Hollywood's great work to consumers."

The settlement allows RealNetworks to refocus on its key offerings, such as the Rhapsody music subscription service, its online properties (RollingStone.com and Film.com), RealPlayer, and RealArcade.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By cyriene on 3/4/2010 9:42:39 AM , Rating: 5
You could just use DVD Fab, DVD Shrink, Handbrake, or many other great apps for free without adding in crazy copy protection...




RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By AnnihilatorX on 3/4/2010 9:45:53 AM , Rating: 3
cause it's a bit more user friendly and people thought it's legal?

But nevertheless it seems the judge doesn't agree.


RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By Ristogod on 3/4/2010 9:54:16 AM , Rating: 2
The judge is an idiot. This idea that if I pay for it, I'm suppose to own it, yet I can't do what I want with it, means I don't really own it.

This idea that hollywood and the recording industry is so worried about protecting their content is completely fabricated. The only thing they are interested in protecting is their extensive product markup.


RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By StevoLincolnite on 3/4/10, Rating: -1
RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By legoman666 on 3/4/2010 11:24:02 AM , Rating: 5
You should read about Monsanto


RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By Lord 666 on 3/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By ebakke on 3/4/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By porkpie on 3/4/2010 8:10:33 PM , Rating: 2
"The local nursery has merely planted/grown what any person could've planted/grown themselves."

Can any person make their own Hollywood thriller?


By FoxFour on 3/4/2010 11:25:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Can any person make their own Hollywood thriller?

Every time I go to sleep...


By wvh on 3/4/2010 7:16:46 PM , Rating: 1
... which is what some nice companies do in some of the countries the US supposedly liberates and helps out. Missing out on some crappy Hollywood movies, not too bad. Losing the right to your own crops, slightly bigger issue... It's not that I think all patents are bad, there just doesn't seem to be a balance anymore between people like you and me and the large corporations with powerful lobbies. In so many cases these days, patents are used for purposes directly opposed to the very reason they came into being.

I also think the apathy of the general public is to blame. Most people would not agree with the notion of not owning what you just bought, yet as long as nobody's coming for them, they rather not think about it.

If just half of DVD owners would stand up and for once tell Hollywood to shove it, we finally might send a strong signal and get somewhere. As it stands, those large corporations just keep on lobbying and taking our rights away bit by bit ('scuse the pun).


RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By PrinceGaz on 3/4/2010 7:26:25 PM , Rating: 2
When you buy a DVD, you are paying only for the licence which allows you to legally play the content contained on the DVD, directly from the DVD. Copying it onto any other media for whatever reason is illegal, whether it is for your own use or anyone elses. If you want to play it on a device which cannot play an original DVD, then the correct thing to do is to buy a version which will play on that device. Whilst that may require that you buy several copies of a given movie to cover all devices you'd like to watch it on, doing so will ensure copyright holders get proper compensation for their work.

Movies are available in formats which will play on many devices, and there is a legal Universal disc format (UMD) which will play on any device. If you had bought a movie on UMD instead of DVD, it would play legally on every device available today capable of playing movies, or could be legally converted to play on them.

Possibly.


By StevoLincolnite on 3/4/2010 9:35:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When you buy a DVD, you are paying only for the licence which allows you to legally play the content contained on the DVD, directly from the DVD. Copying it onto any other media for whatever reason is illegal,


Which I think is just plain wrong, possession is 9/10ths of the law, if I buy something it's mine to do with as I wish, these Media Company's need a reality check.


RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By Pirks on 3/4/2010 10:12:00 AM , Rating: 5
Yeah, and if you have $$$ there's Slysoft which pwns absolutely everyone comfort-wise, although being pricey.

Nothing can beat AnyDVD HD ripping as far as I'm aware, lemme know if someting better came up already ;)


By LRonaldHubbs on 3/4/2010 10:28:20 AM , Rating: 3
For once you have said something I can agree with.


RE: Wjy would anyone pay for this when...
By bhieb on 3/4/2010 12:20:10 PM , Rating: 2
LOL was thinking the same thing Pirks with a 4 rating, say it isn't so.


By Pirks on 3/4/2010 2:23:55 PM , Rating: 2
hehe tony swash is getting beaten instead of me at the moment in the apple patent threads so I'm on vacation for a day or two, time to get some rating back :P when swash is down I'll be back baby, I'll be back ;)


By fictisiousname on 3/4/2010 11:28:41 AM , Rating: 2
on my computer with legally purchased OS, BR movies and components? Seems I have to cough up MORE money for software.


BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By jtaylor13 on 3/4/2010 10:03:00 AM , Rating: 2
I say boycott buying dvd until we have the right to copy what we BOUGHT.The movie makers turning out the garbage they do.
We should boycott the biggest dvd release.Only way to get tru to rich people is to turn them into poor people.




RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By kmmatney on 3/4/2010 10:44:33 AM , Rating: 3
I already stopped buying DVDs a long time ago. I just rent them from Redbox or local store and copy them. Oh, wait...


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By kmmatney on 3/4/2010 10:52:50 AM , Rating: 2
In reality, how many people are paying money for this type of software to copy their own DVDs? I bet very few. I'll admit I've never copied a single DVD I own. But I do use the freeware programs RipIt4Me, combined with DVD Decryptor, to copy LOTS of DVDs I've rented.

BTW - RipIt4Me diesn't work right away in Windows - it has problems accessing the DVD drive. However if you install Virtual PC and run it in XP Virtual Mode, it works great. Just shows the XP mode goes down to the hardware level.


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By bhieb on 3/4/2010 12:28:27 PM , Rating: 1
Umm people that want to be as legal as possible. Sure a company making it is a big target, and legally the judge probably followed the letter of the law (even if it is a screwed up one). However I would be very interested in a court case of an end user with a hard drive full of movies that he owned the original disks of. To me this would be much much harder for them to file for any damages.

You however are blatantly a thief, nothing more. Feel free to glorify yourself as a rebel, or whatever but that is all you are and are part of the problem not a solution.

DT expect an MPAA court order for this posters IP information.


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By tallcool1 on 3/4/2010 1:10:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
DT expect an MPAA court order for this posters IP information.

facepalm!


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By T2k on 3/4/2010 2:44:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You however are blatantly a thief, nothing more. Feel free to glorify yourself as a rebel, or whatever but that is all you are and are part of the problem not a solution. DT expect an MPAA court order for this posters IP information.


Are you high?


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By bhieb on 3/5/2010 10:03:43 AM , Rating: 2
The last part was a joke.

But yes if you are renting movies and copying them you are stealing plain and simple. How you see it any other way is beyond me. I fully support our right to copy something we own for our own use. But to rent one for $3 and copy it for your use then yeah your stealing. Now if your copying it to watch while you have it rented (say on your iPod/Laptop), and after you destroy your copy, then maybe you could make a case.

This behavior is exactly what the MPAA is in a hissy over. They could care less if I buy a DVD and watch it off my media server (well maybe the care a wee bit), however the guy spending $20/month on a netflix subscription ripping 100 DVD's a month is blatantly stealing. AND it is that same type of personality that will most likely torrent (or flat out copy) these to all his buddies.

If you don't see how that is theft I can't help you, you obviously do not have the moral apptitude to comprehend that. And YES you are part of the problem, the entitlement attitude in this country today is astounding, you don't deserve to copy it just because you don't like/approve of the business model.

Do I think the MPAA are a buch of greedy a-holes? Hell yes. Do i think it is OK to steal from the because of it? NO

Evil begets evil.


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By kmmatney on 3/4/2010 6:21:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Umm people that want to be as legal as possible


Yeah, and PirateBay is mostly used for legal downloads as well...

I'm not saying I'm a rebel, or glorifying it, and I agree with fining this company for selling software that allows people to do it. Even though I have copied movies I rented, still feel its wrong for someone to make money off of that.

I do own most of my own music collection (200+ CDs), although most of that was purchased in the 80's and 90's. I remember many times in college trying to decide if I should eat something healthy, or buy a new CD. Usually I would buy the CD, and have to eat spaghetti for rest of the week. It sucked, but I'm sort of glad I had to go through that. (credit cards were much harder to get back then, and personal computers didn't really exist yet, so you spent your money on music).

I'm sort of glad I bought most of my music in the 80s and early 90s


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By bhieb on 3/5/2010 10:16:06 AM , Rating: 2
Well to address why buy the software, I would say convenience. AnyDVD is updated regularly, and extremely easy to use will all windows OS's.

And it depends on your use. You seem to want something for less, by renting then copying to own so to speak. So you would be far less likely to seek out a paid option. However with the media boxes these days and cheap storage, there is a growing market that just wants an online catalog of movies on their home network.

I have 500+ that I own. It is a pain to find the disk when I want to watch something. It is far nicer to use a SlingBox and stream it off of my server. And if I went to the trouble to set all that up (let alone buy 500 dvd in my life) what is another $70 for a good reliable software?

quote:
Yeah, and PirateBay is mostly used for legal downloads as well...

This is irrelavant if you own the disk what does PirateBay have to do with anything. If your stealing it (as I contend you are), then that might be some thing you relate to. Me personally, I have never torrented anything ever, as I don't copy stuff I don't own. But each of us has their own morality, you are ok with it, I am not.


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By cerx on 3/4/2010 1:26:29 PM , Rating: 2
Stealing is wrong. If you don't like the system, do something to change it. I think the system is horrible so I buy very few dvds or cds. But I rent from Netflix and download from itunes so I still get the music and movies I want, legallly.

I think the big music companies will eventually fold, because musicians can put their music on the radio and itunes as easily as a corporate exec, and keep the extra money. Movies are a bit different since they cost so much to make, but I'm hoping there's a shift in the way they do business, too.


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By CU on 3/4/2010 1:49:51 PM , Rating: 2
Stealing could be doing something to change it. Consider it a revolt or a civil war. If everyone steals it then they make no money and they cannot fine us all without going under.


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By porkpie on 3/4/2010 8:14:22 PM , Rating: 2
"If everyone steals it then they make no money"

Right. Then the studios fold, and stop making movies entirely.

Does the phrase "Pyrrhic victory" mean anything to you?


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By kmmatney on 3/4/2010 6:26:15 PM , Rating: 2
Well, it more like I just want to be able to watch the movie when its convenient. NetFlix isn't good for me, as I often travel, and might not rent a movie for several weeks. So its easier to use RedBox, copy them, and watch them on the road or when I have a chance. I figre its better than downloading, at least. Either way, I think using NetFlix or Redbox is pretty much the same to the Movie industry. Your just forced to watch them right away if you use NetFlix.


RE: BOYCOT BUYING DVD
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/4/2010 6:41:28 PM , Rating: 2
I've used RipIt4Me on XP32 and Vista64 with no problems. Can't speak for Win7 though.


Someone needs to do this...
By Motoman on 3/4/2010 10:29:23 AM , Rating: 5
Someone needs to bring to a court of law the issue of having one law that makes it illegal to exercise a right guaranteed elsewhere in the law.

Fair Use law guarantees a consumer the right to make a backup of media they legally purchased. This is an indisbutable fact - it's on the law books.

The Big Media lobbyists also bought another law - making it illegal to circumvent any DRM infections on the media you bought to make a backup. This is also an indisputable fact - it's on the law books.

...which ultimately begs the question of how it is permissible to enact a law which makes it illegal to exercise a right explicitly given in another law.

And yes - by all means, boycott any media purchases. The problem is that the VAST majority of consumers are lemmings who don't even consider such issues. So a boycott will never actually happen.

And also continue to point out that no DRM has ever prevented piracy - and in fact, the more draconian the DRM, the more piracy has occurred of that particular product (see Spore). DRM will never prevent piracy. DRM is *at the very best* a waste of money on the part of media producers - because the money they spend on DRM does precisely NOTHING to prevent piracy. In reality, by putting DRM on their products they invite piracy, and keep would-be legitmate consumers from buying their product in the first place.

When buying a legitimate copy forces you to give up your rights as a consumer, piracy becomes the better option.




By BlaneWoodard on 3/4/2010 10:42:04 AM , Rating: 2
Must be that DRM pays.


RE: Someone needs to do this...
By bluemanta on 3/4/2010 12:37:49 PM , Rating: 2
Very well said. It seems like the Holywood executives are the only ones who doesn't understand the raising prices and implementing useless DRM only encourage more piracy.

Perhaps one day they will realize this when the movie industry reaches the same state as the music industry.. but then it will be too late for them to do anything about it.

It's time for Holywood to step up to the 21st century and adopt a more creative business models to generate revenue rather than stick to an obsolete methods of protecting their precious content.


RE: Someone needs to do this...
By Motoman on 3/4/2010 12:55:19 PM , Rating: 4
The fact of the matter is that DRM should be absolutely illegal - in light of Fair Use law which guarantees a consumer the right to make a backup copy of media they have purchase.

DRM. Should. Be. Illegal.

If I was a lawyer I'd just take this to court. When a law is enacted that makes exercising a right granted by another law illegal, there has to be a reckoning.

...and if the reckoning is that Fair Use law gets vacated, then fine - I'll never buy any media again.


RE: Someone needs to do this...
By Solandri on 3/4/2010 3:14:28 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Fair Use law guarantees a consumer the right to make a backup of media they legally purchased. This is an indisbutable fact - it's on the law books.

The Big Media lobbyists also bought another law - making it illegal to circumvent any DRM infections on the media you bought to make a backup. This is also an indisputable fact - it's on the law books.

...which ultimately begs the question of how it is permissible to enact a law which makes it illegal to exercise a right explicitly given in another law.

Going off the premise that when you buy a DVD you are a buying a license to view the content, then the loss or destruction of the DVD does not invalidate the license. There isn't really an issue with Fair Use if the Big Media company provides an alternate means to replace a lost or damaged DVD (thus obviating the need to make backup copies) at a reasonable cost (i.e. not "go out and buy another retail copy). I don't really like it, I'd prefer to make my own copies, but logically that stance is sound.

However, the only Big Media company I know which has a replacement policy is Disney, probably because too many parents call them saying their kid has destroyed their Disney cartoon movie DVD.

http://disney.go.com/disneyvideos/dvdsupport/faq.h...

If the other studios have a replacement policy, they're doing a pretty good job of hiding them. What I do disagree with is the concept that the studios can control what you do with the DVD after purchasing it because it's a license, yet if you lose or destroy the physical DVD the license somehow evaporates and you have to buy a new retail copy. Either it's a license and I'm entitled to a low-cost replacement, or it's a product and I can do whatever I want with it including copying it. Can't be both.


RE: Someone needs to do this...
By mostyle on 3/5/2010 8:07:48 AM , Rating: 2
This guy needs a 6.. Seriously.

I think it's insane that we have legal wright to posses backups yet a company can deploy mechanisms to inhibit the action the we are entitled to and as soon as we take a step to reinstate our wrights we are termed criminal.

Sad thing is that this stance dancing is present in many areas.. Perfect parallel would be laws regarding safety equipment in vehicles in the municipality that I reside in.

One law specifically states that as long as one tail light on a vehicle is functioning that the vehicle is acceptable. At the same time however a law exists that says all equipment on a given vehicle must function as intended.

Bottom line, you are still in violation.. Sad that this mentality permeates multiple areas.


How does this affect building a HTPC?
By sparkuss on 3/4/2010 10:28:10 AM , Rating: 2
I have been thinking of trying HTPCs. Does this mean there is now no legal way to get the content onto the HTPC?

Several above listed other programs, do they not break the new language in the suit as well?




RE: How does this affect building a HTPC?
By Motoman on 3/4/2010 10:30:27 AM , Rating: 4
Sure there is - insert the disk you want to play.

...but if you exercise your law-given right to make a backup copy of that disk, you become a criminal.


RE: How does this affect building a HTPC?
By sparkuss on 3/4/2010 10:35:41 AM , Rating: 2
Well that's exactly why I ask because the disclaimer of one of the programs already listed looks like it is just as illegal under the results of the suit.

quote:
You may use this software in copying material in which you own the copyright or have obtained permission to copy from the copyright owner. If you do not own the copyright or you have not obtained the permission to copy from the copyright owner, you may be violating copyright law and you may be subject to claims for damages and/or criminal penalties.


By Hieyeck on 3/4/2010 2:16:50 PM , Rating: 2
EULAs mean nothing. Everyone ignores them, including judges.


By porkpie on 3/4/2010 8:28:44 PM , Rating: 3
"...but if you exercise your law-given right to make a backup copy of that disk, you become a criminal."

Guys, this isn't true at all. Depending on Jason's story for facts is a VERY dicey proposition.

What the judge ACTUALLY said is this:

quote:
Judge Patel, in her ruling in the RealNetworks case, said “while it may well be fair use for an individual consumer to store a backup copy of a personally owned DVD on that individual’s computer, a federal law has nonetheless made it illegal to manufacture or traffic in a device or tool that permits a consumer to make such copies.”

You can copy disks all you want. You just can't make a tool that lets other people do it.


RE: How does this affect building a HTPC?
By erikstarcher on 3/4/2010 6:51:13 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, you are correct. If you want to rip a DVD to your HTPC, unless the disk has no DRM on it, you will be breaking the law. The other programs listed also break the (U.S.)law just like realDVD but these companies are not from the US and that is why they are not being dragged into court.


By sparkuss on 3/4/2010 11:26:25 PM , Rating: 2
So..does anyone know whether the DVD releases that "come with" a digital copy have DRM in them?

Any chance that the conflict here can push effort to "force" the copyright holders to "provide" one legal backup copy?


F*CK THE MPAA
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/4/2010 6:49:58 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
In the statement [Judge Marilyn Patel] said that customers never have the right to make copies of content they legally own, if it's copy protected.

Well in that case, fuck her too. I hope she dies an agonizing death.




RE: F*CK THE MPAA
By porkpie on 3/4/2010 9:53:14 PM , Rating: 2
As I pointed out above, the judge said no such thing.

You can make copies for backup purposes. You cannot sell a tool that allows people to circumvent DRM.


RE: F*CK THE MPAA
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/10/2010 7:37:48 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the info, I hadn't seen your other post about this. I guess I should have known better than to believe Jason's conclusions about the ruling.
quote:
a federal law has nonetheless made it illegal to manufacture or traffic in a device or tool that permits a consumer to make such copies

I see now that my hatred is misplaced. This judge merely did her job. It is the people who lobbied for and passed the aforementioned law that need to die agonizing deaths (in fire if possible).


RE: F*CK THE MPAA
By Dorkyman on 3/9/2010 4:08:00 PM , Rating: 2
You really like that word. You might want to get out more, and maybe enter into a relationship with a female.

Also, hoping someone "dies an agonizing death" is a pathetic point of view. Get a life. Oh, and find that female.


RE: F*CK THE MPAA
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/10/2010 6:15:37 PM , Rating: 1
And you, sir, can kindly go choke on a dick. Kthnx.


RE: F*CK THE MPAA
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/10/2010 7:50:50 PM , Rating: 2
Oops, almost forgot...
quote:
Also, hoping someone "dies an agonizing death" is a pathetic point of view.

Actually, opposition to my fair use rights (or any of my rights, for that matter) is a pathetic point of view, and anyone who stands in such opposition deserves to die an agonizing death. If I read tomorrow that Mitch Bainwol or Cary Sherman (leaders of the RIAA) had died painfully in some tragic accident, I would be nothing short of exultant.


This judge...
By jwdR1 on 3/4/2010 10:07:39 AM , Rating: 2
just made me a criminal.




RE: This judge...
By Camikazi on 3/4/2010 11:46:17 AM , Rating: 2
To Cell Block 6 with you!


RE: This judge...
By Omega215D on 3/5/2010 4:10:57 AM , Rating: 2
He shall be sent to Nova Prospekt!


Too Bad They Didn't Both Bankrupt Each Other
By Egglick on 3/4/2010 2:36:28 PM , Rating: 2
I'm torn on how I feel about this. On one hand, it's unfortunately a landmark case for the MPAA. OTOH, I still have a deep-seated hatred for RealNetworks and all they represent. Everyone at Real should die of gonorrhea and rot in hell for what they did to us in the late 90's.




RE: Too Bad They Didn't Both Bankrupt Each Other
By kmmatney on 3/4/2010 6:27:47 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think RealDVD is related to RealNetworks (could be wrong, though).


By kmmatney on 3/4/2010 6:42:34 PM , Rating: 2
My bad - RealDVD is related to RealNetworks. I pretty much agree that real networks has always been crap.


The judge looked at the DMCA
By DonTHB on 3/7/2010 12:39:49 AM , Rating: 2
and found that our fair use rights were removed with that legislation.

Don't blame the judge blame Congress, but many of us (public) let them get away with it.




RE: The judge looked at the DMCA
By DonTHB on 3/7/2010 12:42:48 AM , Rating: 2
I should add that things that do not require the circumvention of copy protection (encryption) retain fair use rights.


Dear Movie Studios
By jbwhite99 on 3/4/2010 10:04:56 AM , Rating: 3
My copy of ___ is scratched, or the kid poured milk on the disk and ruined it. I assume you will replace the disk for free, right? I would have made a copy of it, but that is not legal, so please send a replacement, free of charge to ____ - enclosed is a copy of my receipt.




It's a sad day
By bluemanta on 3/4/2010 12:46:12 PM , Rating: 2
It's a sad day because Real was a small beacon of hope in this stupid race of useless protection the studios are trying to enforce on paying consumers.

Well done MCCA. You just made the ILLEGAL ripping software apps more in demand! :)

I guess next we can expect the studios to charge an extra fee for allowing us to actually watch the DVD we just purchased.... lol




Why did they settle?
By CU on 3/4/2010 1:47:52 PM , Rating: 2
I wish they had take in to the supreme court. That way they would have to rule on which law is correct. Either I can make a copy of anything I legally buy or I cannot copy it if it is protected. I would hope the supreme court would up hold the first law which says you can copy it if you legally buy it.




"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki