Slashdot Mirror
Philips Says Compact Discs Can't be Copyprotected
Tomcat666 writes "tecChannel has a story about Philips, the holder of the most CD digital audio (CD-DA) patents. Apparently, they don't like the audio CD copy protection many record companies want to enforce in the future. They break the CD-DA standard and therefore are not allowed to use the logo. As a conclusion, Philips' next audio CD copier will be able to detect and probably circumvent the copy protection of audio CDs."
This article is Auf Deutsch but the fish does a tolerable job of
making it sane for those who can't remember the proper gender of all
their nouns.
first post?
eh?
EAT A cock taco!!!!!!!! Yeah baby.\
free kevin
No way!
/.: why the hell am I here?
big business supporting the little guys.
Regardless of copyright, would they not be in violation of copyright for producing a device that bypasses a circumvention method?
DMCA seems to be more important then other laws, such as fair use lately.
I wonder if Phillips is prepared to fight against the DMCA, that would be a huge boost in the fight.
If they do, my next cd-rom will be phillips.
Get a Apex AD-500w at your local walmart for $99 ..then go to http://www.apexmodchip.com/order.html and oder you a mod chip for $20 bucks and your set. Unless you mean a DVD player for your pc.
----
I Am The Why Troll
.
o.O THE OS/9 ? For the CoCo? That was by Philips?
Go Kathryn Thurber!
Negative moderation is flawed. It is obviously unhelpful for one
moderator to mod something down as "redundant" if another moderator
has already modded the post up as "informative" earlier.
The "flamebait" label and to a lesser degree the "troll" label are all
also used continuously to moderate down posts which are clearly
on-topic and which make valid points but which the moderator in
question disagrees with.
I think that slashcode needs to be rewritten to separate negative and
positive moderation points. Each moderator receiving moderation points
will get AT MOST one negative point per batch of points, and there
will only be a 50% chance that the moderator will even receive this
one negative moderator point.
The system can work with positive moderation only; users can read at
+3 or +4 to see only the best posts. I already feel like I've missed
many informative, helpful posts -- including many that were
*previously* modded up -- because others have seen fit to mod them
back down, usually (in the case of "flamebait" and "troll") because
they disagree with them, often because (in the case of "redundant")
they just apparently have moderator points to burn before they run out
of time.
Negative moderation should be very, very rare on a system like this
one; to do anything else is to stifle the free exchange of ideas.
Ali (R, 157 min.)
12:50pm | 4:20pm | 7:40pm | 11:20pm
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (PG, 153 min.)
12:40pm | 4:20pm | 7:40pm | 11:20pm
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (PG-13, 178 min.)
12:30pm | 1:00pm | 1:40pm | 3:00pm | 4:10pm | 5:00pm | 5:20pm | 7:20pm |
8:00pm | 9:00pm | 9:20pm | 11:00pm
Monsters, Inc. (G, 90 min.)
12:00pm | 2:20pm | 4:40pm | 7:10pm | 9:30pm
Ocean's 11 (PG-13, 114 min.)
12:50pm | 1:50pm | 4:00pm | 7:10pm | 7:30pm | 10:10pm
Vanilla Sky (R, 136 min.)
12:50pm | 3:50pm | 7:00pm | 10:00pm
A Beautiful Mind (PG-13, 135 min.)
12:20pm | 3:10pm | 6:50pm | 10:00pm
The Royal Tenenbaums (R, 108 min.)
12:00pm | 2:30pm | 5:00pm | 7:30pm | 10:00pm | 12:30am
Not Another Teen Movie (R, 82 min.)
4:30pm | 9:50pm | 12:10am
Joe Somebody (PG, 98 min.)
12:20pm | 2:40pm | 5:00pm | 7:20pm | 9:40pm | 12:00am
Kate & Leopold (PG-13, 118 min.)
1:00pm | 4:10pm | 7:00pm | 10:10pm
Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius (G, 84 min.)
12:00pm | 12:30pm | 2:10pm | 2:30pm | 4:10pm | 4:30pm | 6:40pm | 9:10pm |
11:30pm
How High (R, 94 min.)
12:30pm | 2:50pm | 5:30pm | 7:50pm | 10:10pm | 12:20am
The Majestic (PG, 150 min.)
7:20pm | 11:10pm
Gosford Park (R, 137 min.)
12:20pm | 4:00pm | 7:00pm | 10:00pm
Orange County (PG-13, 81 min.)
12:10pm | 1:00pm | 2:20pm | 3:10pm | 4:40pm | 5:20pm | 7:10pm | 7:50pm |
9:30pm | 10:20pm | 12:10am
Behind Enemy Lines (PG-13, 105 min.)
12:10pm | 2:40pm | 5:10pm | 7:40pm | 10:20pm
Impostor (PG-13, 96 min.)
12:10pm | 2:40pm | 5:10pm | 7:30pm | 10:20pm
---
Lord of the Things: One Thing to Rule Them All!
Negative moderation is flawed. It is obviously unhelpful for one
moderator to mod something down as "redundant" or "overrated" if
another moderator has already modded the post up as "informative"
or "insightful" earlier.
The "flamebait" label and to a lesser degree the "troll" label are all
also used continuously to moderate down posts which are clearly
on-topic and which make valid points but which the moderator in
question disagrees with.
I think that slashcode needs to be rewritten to separate negative and
positive moderation points. Each moderator receiving moderation points
will get AT MOST one negative point per batch of points, and there
will only be a 50% chance that the moderator will even receive this
one negative moderator point.
The system can work with positive moderation only; users can read at
+3 or +4 to see only the best posts. I already feel like I've missed
many informative, helpful posts -- including many that were
*previously* modded up -- because others have seen fit to mod them
back down, usually (in the case of "flamebait" and "troll") because
they disagree with them, often because (in the case of "redundant")
they just apparently have moderator points to burn before they run out
of time.
Negative moderation should be very, very rare on a system like this
one; to do anything else is to stifle the free exchange of ideas.
I invariably meta-moderate all negative mods as unfair.
Negative moderation is flawed. It is obviously unhelpful for one
moderator to mod something down as "redundant" or "overrated" if
another moderator has already modded the post up as "informative"
earlier.
The "flamebait" label and to a lesser degree the "troll" label are all
also used continuously to moderate down posts which are clearly
on-topic and which make valid points but which the moderator in
question disagrees with.
I think that slashcode needs to be rewritten to separate negative and
positive moderation points. Each moderator receiving moderation points
will get AT MOST one negative point per batch of points, and there
will only be a 50% chance that the moderator will even receive this
one negative moderator point.
The system can work with positive moderation only; users can read at
+3 or +4 to see only the best posts. I already feel like I've missed
many informative, helpful posts -- including many that were
*previously* modded up -- because others have seen fit to mod them
back down, usually (in the case of "flamebait" and "troll") because
they disagree with them, often because (in the case of "redundant")
they just apparently have moderator points to burn before they run out
of time.
Negative moderation should be very, very rare on a system like this
one; to do anything else is to stifle the free exchange of ideas.
I invariably meta-moderate all negative mods as unfair.
Not true, they not only attempt to harm B&N with it, but extort money from Apple and others who license it...