Slashdot Mirror
Crippled CD Deemed Defective In France
Noryungi writes "The daily newspaper Liberation reports that at least one person got her money back, by suing EMI, no less. She was able to do that with the help of the largest consumer organization in France, which has its own list of articles on this subject.
So, French people who cannot read their copy-protected CDs can get their money back, but copy protection is not made illegal by the court decision... It's certainly a step in the right direction, though..."
For the French-impaired, an anonymous reader adds "The Register has a good article on EMI being forced to refund the cost of a copy-protected CD, because it was found to have a 'hidden defect' -- it wouldn't work on a car's CD player ... Is the tide changing?"
It's good to see not all countries have turned themselves over to corporate interests, but a victory in France (which doesn't exactly have a history of putting foreign corporate interests ahead of their own citizens) doesn't say much about the tide in the US.
Jason
ProfQuotes
Needless to say (but I'll say it anyway) the clear answer to that is:
"DON'T BUY COPY PROTECTED DISKS"
It's called boycotting and it works.
In Soviet Russia, the television watches YOU!
You are kidding, right? Do you honestly believe that EMI, let alone the record industry as a whole, is going to change their practices because of a single insignificant law suite that cost them a single CD and court costs? Here comes the clue train.
This will have no impact on them whatever. They will continue with business as usual and for each returned CD that they get, they will sell millions.
The only way for there to be a "changing tide" is if they are seriously affected monetarily, as in a major drop in sales, or if they are legally bound by a class action suite or something similar.
I doubt that this means much. Just like the guy who was able to get $200 back from some major OEM for Windows XP by taking it to small claims, it's not going to change "business". It will take hundreds of those kind of lawsuits and the accompanying legal bills to make a difference. I mean, if you're spending $1 million in attorney's fees to represent a company for $100k in refunds, what do you think you're going to do? Look at how effective "our" /. boycott on the RIAA, Sony, Disney, et al is. A few loud mouth geeks don't mean anything in the real world. Remember high school? Remember how nobody listened to you because you were just a nerd and were "uncool"? What makes you think things have changed just because you're an adult? We can raise a stink, but no one cares. They're still writing the checks, consuming like mindless idiots, and the vocal minority still doesn't get what we want. You have to think to yourself that most of the Joe Consumer's out there will buy a defective product and if it doesn't work, are still too lazy to take it back (see Radar Jammers).
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
And if you were living in the states, you'd have committed a federal crime, by violating the DMCA. As you circumvented a copy protection system.
I find it somewhat bizare that EMI would even littigate the case. The product was clearly defective as manufactured and so under EU law the consumer has an absolute right to a full refund. No pissy-US '90 day' guarantees here. If you sell something that is broke the consumer gets a refund, period.
As for the wider political context, don't forget what the French Ambassador to the UN said on the subject of Iraq, basically that France belives it is not opposing US interests, just that it believes it has a better idea of what those interests are. The US came to regret not taking French advice in Vietnam and according to Paris will come to regret not taking their advice on the subject of invading Iraq.
From this we can deduce two things, first that the French can be insufferably arrogant for such a small country whose military success under Napoleon turned out to be what the music industry would call a 'one hit wonder', being followed by flop after flop. The only recent successes being in the consolation prize category of 'quickest surrender'. And no Jaques, the magnificent conquest of the Sahara desert does not qualify a country as an empire. The test of an empire is not merely the acreage under occupation, the locals have to actually be at least aware of the occupation.
The other thing we may deduce is that despite the fact they are frequently arrogant and obnoxious the French are frequently right, particularly when it comes to the 'stop the US from pig-headed self defeating policy blunder' category.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
What if you needed special glasses to see the great works of art from the Renasance?
Copyright law is about giving companies a way to profit from selling their works for a limited time before said works become part of our collective culture. Just because computers enter into the picture does not make it okay to take a jackhammer to tradition.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
Do you think she would have cared what temperature the coffee was at when she did this?
Yes.
If the sign had said "Warning: Coffee causes third degree burns" do you think she would have acted differently?
Yes. Though that would still be stupid, a cup which has enough structural rigidity to not collapse without the lid would be a better solution.
Assuming she's mentally stable she doesn't go around her daily life deciding whether to do things or not based on how bad a burn she gets ("Gee, I should touch the hot stove, I only get a second degree burn this way!") so why was this important for her coffee?
That's exactly what everyone does.
I don't put on safety gloves when I get a can of coke from a vending machine. I assume it will be cold but not so cold as to hurt me. If the vending machine operator decided that keeping the cans in liquid nitrogen made them last longer I would expect some warning about the unexpected temperature the cans would be.
When I buy a coffee I expect it to be reasonably hot and I take suitable care. I don't tip it over my head, for example. However, I don't put on safety gear before buying my morning coffee. I don't make sure everybody around me keeps at least a meter away. Since I know if someone bumps into me and my coffee splashes onto my chest it won't do serious damage - it'll just wet my shirt. If the coffee vendor decided that the coffee would be better if it was acidic enough to eat through clothing and skin, then I would expect some warning - and I would take more precautions...
When I buy a slice of pizza I don't test the temperature with a thermometer. I assume it is at a suitable temperature for eating, though the first bite might be a bit careful in case the cheese is too hot. I assume it isn't hot enough to burn my hand through the plate as I hold it though.
Everyone I see does numerous things everyday that are slightly risky because the potential damage is small enough to not be worth taking more care.
If the potential damage of those actions suddenly increased they would want some warning.
I've spilt coffee on myself before. All it did was make my clothes a bit wet. I've never spilt any potent acids on myself (even though I used them way back when I was doing chem. eng.). I must have been more careful with the acid than with the coffee. I did exactly what you seem to think is abnormal. I figured wearing safety gear and being very precise about my movements wasn't necessary when I was carrying the cup of coffee down the hall, because the damage it could do (making me wet) wasn't worth the hassle.
Then again, maybe you walk around in a plastic bubble (after all you could catch a virus and die - that's a pretty serious thing) and handle your hot coffee and cold coke with tongs.