Slashdot Mirror
RIAA vs Linux and DVDs
PlayfullyClever writes "The entertainment industry has put itself on the fast-track to destruction, using well-proven tactics as explained in Preventing DVD Playback on Linux Like Prohibition in the 1920's. Are their heavy-handed tactics to lock up and control everything we touch signs of plain old human stubborness?" Or more likely- greed.
The RIAA - Hollywood - DRM - Linux Suicide Pact
far...out
Shouldn't that be the MPAA, not the RIAA, which would have an issue with Linux circumventing the encryption of DVDs?
Some history about the Linux flap:g arfinkel.txt
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/archive/
Some other page I found by accident about file sharing:
http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/howto-notgetsued.php
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Submitter, aka PlayfullyClever trying to use the /. crowd's love for linux+entertainment to bump up his google page rank on the site he just registered yesterday?
Why else would TFA have nothing to do with the submission?
Bealtes-Beatles in disguise, with diamonds?
FYI
Domain Name: PLAYFULLYCLEVER.COM
Registrar: TUCOWS INC.
Updated Date: 30-nov-2005
Creation Date: 30-nov-2005
Expiration Date: 30-nov-2006
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
They cannot get over the idea that once you purchase something it no longer belongs to them.
Likewise, there are a lot of folks on the other side of the fence, who can't get over the idea that purchasing a CD does not give them the right to distribute copies of that CD to a million of their closest friends.
This is why they call people "pirates" when they do what they want with their own stuff.
Pop quiz: Who went to the Supreme Court to defend the idea that a manufacturer of a device that can be used for piracy is not liable for the actions of end users who abuse it for such activity, so long as the device has "substantial non-infringing uses"? Answer: Sony, a member of both the RIAA and MPAA. Who, in the same case, helped establish the precedent that time-shifting is legal under the "fair use" provision of US copyright law? Again, Sony did.
The *AA's have not, to the best of my knowledge, taken any sort of action against someone who was simply time- or media-shifting "their own stuff." In fact, as shown above, at least one member of these cartels has gone to a lot of trouble to defend your right to do just that.
They have, on the other hand, filed many lawsuits where the target of the lawsuit was allegedly distributing copies of "stuff" without having obtained a legal license to do so. That's an entirely different kettle of fish.
I dislike the media monopoly as much as anyone - in fact, I'd read and been alarmed by Bagdikian's "Media Monopoly" book before most of the people here had even heard of the RIAA or MPAA. But let's be realistic - straw-man arguments and paranoid, ill-informed rantings are not helpful to the cause.
Lost: Sig, white with black letters. No collar. Reward if found!