I've been getting this with a LOT of content lately.... And I dont really know why. I got it with icravetv just before they shut down, but it worked the week before.
Only thing I can say: Real, get off your asses and update this year old alpha already!
This is not cool. And this bit about abridging free speech to only poitical matters: no way. I'm sorry; the US government is bad in a lot of ways, but it's done one thing I'm proud of: it's the only nation with a free speech clause in its Constitution.
No I'm wondering why people get all in arms about people complaining about taxpayer money going to subsidize someone's porn surfing habit at a library.
Are you completely clueless or do you just play someone who is on/.?
When you want to view porn, wheres the first place you go, a public library? Give me a break.
The publicness and openness of the library, for 99% of people today, would inhibit them from checking out porn. You wouldnt be nervous and/or apprihensive checking out some muff at a local library? Heh. People doing this intentionally would be such a small fraction of reality it isnt even funny.
Interesting, my favorite distrib is Slack also, been using it for years now, and by no means should be come in last against any other distrib.
Slack is small, extremely easy to download, the install can be daunting for non-experienced users, but its lean, mean, has great defaults, the init scripts are clean, etc.
I'd suggest something about Slackware users and this train of thought, but I'd get moderated down.:)
But really, having no centrally "best" distribution is a Good Thing(tm), those commercial apps that I notice are only for "Red Hat Linux" will start having to be more standardized.
I find all these "the best distribution" awards are really popularity contests and not really designed to show what is the best. But really, is there a best? More importantly, should there be a best?
I dont think so on both counts. Every distribution has quirks, pros/cons, etc that turn some users on, some off, and make some indifferent. Not to mention that having one "best" distribution that *ahem* "everybody" would use would be a Bad Thing(tm) for various reasons.
In the end, SuSE is a quite popular distribution, but the best? No, I dont think so, and I'm glad its not.
As far as I know, this isn't the case - there are plenty of Region 0 (which I believe = unencrypted) titles about, espcially the non-movie titles like sports, documentaries and porn...
Hrmm, I doubt it would be unencrypted, just able to be played in any DVD player region? However I'm not entirely sure of this, this is the first I have heard of region 0, I was under the impression that DVD players would not play titles which did not have CSS in place.
I'd like to get more information on this, you would still need a larger disc then is available, to copy the majority of titles.
Reading the opinion, I kind of get the feeling that the piracy is more of a PR smokescreen than anything else. Oh, there's the usual throwing of legal gunk against the wall to see what will stick. But the key question is whether, under DMCA, creating a program that defeats a technical copy protection scheme and/or redistributing such a program is illegal even if defeating the technical copy protection measures is useless for making infringing copies.
If I were a defendant I would try to argue that CSS is NOT copy protection, however access protection, therefore not covered by the DMCA at all. I think that would be a wise decision for the EFF to follow.
As far as piracy goes, there's no doubt something like DeCSS might be useful if you had swiped a supply of blanks and had plenty of time on your hands to knock off one or two copies, but DeCSS as far as I can see is neither technically necessary nor sufficient for DVD copying.
To copy a DVD successfully to another disc capable of being played in a DVD player you would NOT use DeCSS AT ALL, and here is why:
1. Consumer available DVD blank discs currently only hold 4 GIG of data, most DVD movies run about 6 to 10 GIG.
2. Consumer available DVD blank discs have the tracks where the DVD player expects the CSS keys to be PRE-WRITTEN with 0's.
3. You don't want to break the encryption, you NEED the encryption IN PLACE, as DVD players will NOT play unencrypted DVD movies, they expect CSS and will not play if it is not there.
The absolute only way to copy a DVD disc so that you have two DVD player readable identical discs is to get your own stamping machine, and you would make a bit-for-bit copy with the encryption IN PLACE, as DVD players expect CSS to be there, these run into thousands of dollars, not really economical if you're only making a few copies for friends huh? However they are economical with big pirates in Asia for instance.
Well it does protect ACCESS in the mindset of PLAYING it, maybe what Ms. Gross should have inserted there is that it does not protect COPYING, it only protects ACCESS for PLAYING.
If I had a credit card I would Bruce, however I did step up and Became a Doe. Just got mail today that they're past the break even mark and the shirts will probably be printed, I encourage others to buy a One of a Kind shirt also!
Propagandize with their money far and wide to sway the public in their favor, link "hackers" with sexy words like "narcotics", and portray them as theives. This is how they expect to win the general populaces support, and right now its working.
Our problem is we have no voice ourside our own circles. The MPAA can write propaganda articles and get them published in the LA Times, but what about us? We have no mass market voice, and they know that and are trying to capitalize on it.
What we need is a stronger voice, one which can get out into major papers, out to the public, we need to tell people whats really going on. Unfortunately I don't really know how we can do this, maybe someone else has a good idea?
From what I'm reading here, it seems that the Sorenson codec is the only one which matters anymore.
And you'd be right, all the new quicktime movies use the sorenson codec, every single one of them, even that TIE-tanic spoof did. You cant watch quicktime movies anymore without sorenson, its impossible.
Come on. QuickTime works fine, even if you believe Apple touts it as the end all be all cross platform media streaming format (wow, that's a lot of qualifiers). You're forgeting operating systems when you say 2. I'll leave you to figure out your mistakes...
Make no mistake about it, the player is useless without the right codecs, There's a real player 5 for linux, and it works (almost) fine, I challenge you to play any G2 stream with it, you wont be able to, not the right codec. The G2 Linux player has been Alpha since MAY, and it too is getting venerable (cant use it with icravetv anymore I've noticed).
Streaming media, and really any media for that matter, is all about codecs, you can release a quicktime player for any OS, but if it doesnt support all the codecs, you're toast.
I stand by my original claim, Quicktime is only released and supported on 2 operating systems, I made no mistake.
... a beowulf cluster of these would be able to crack CSS in 6 months:)
If you could get them on a network, of course...
Ahh, the good old days of sneekernet.
I remmeber my high school had whole labs of these, and during the era of the C64 a friend of mine brought me over to his house, showed me a PET and asked me "Is this thing any good?", my reply "dude, its not even color!", this must have been atleast 15 years ago....
The RealVideo stream contains *MORE* than just the original content, it contains extra advertsing infromation present at the side and bottom of the video signal, and this is what they will be prosectued over.
Well actually it doesnt, because those ads are comming from a separate streams. The TV video is one stream, the ads at the bottom are another, and the ads at the right side are another. If you knew the URL to just the TV stream, you could get it without the other two ad streams, but thats not how they have it setup on their site.
Apple owns the specs to those CODECs and has absolutely no obligation, reason, or interest in releasing them to 'the community'. I'm sure someone can purchase those specs to create their own player if they'd like, but no one will. They won't because then they would have to charge money for their application.
Apple seems to have and exclusive license on the Sorensen codec, so even if someone wanted to, I dont think they could license it.
The real problem I have with Apple is they bring out their over-restrictive ASPL, and "open source" parts of what they call "darwin" (OS X) and expect people to code for them for free, they also tout QuickTime as the end all be all cross platform internet media streaming format, and its supported on what, 2 operating systems? Give me a break.
Their "open source" strategy seems to be to use as many buzzwords as possible to create mind-share, and maybe they'll sell a couple more G4s.
We have about 2.4 devout readers on our various sites (notably including http://slashdot.org and http://freshmeat.net), and we're starting to move into video news production, so this is a substantial offer.
All of 2.4 readers? heh, thats pretty funny. But just as an aside, where did you pick this little snippet up?
Icrave, by wrapping their own banners around the outside of the signal (sort of shrinking the original signal).. well.. that seems to constitute 'modifying' the content of the signal.
Thats rediculous! rofl! With this logic, you're going to now ban any TV with more pixels then the NTSC specifies? They aren't modifying the signal in any way, with or without the ads on the bottom and the right, the signal would HAVE to be rastered smaller to be useful to anyone who doesn't have an OC3. Not to mention, I can click "Double Size" or "Full Screen" in real player, clicking that am I also modifying the content?
'm not knocking, I use it all the time, but let's avoid getting too up-in-arms about this. You all know as well as I do that iCrave has always been a little questionable.
In Canada its not questionable at all, its well within the law.
This isn't about Big Bad Corporate America stifling the global evolution of the net, either. When those networks sell advertising, it's with the understanding from their customers that they will have 30 seconds of captive audience. You can't run a site that sponges off other people's (very very large) investments for your own personal gain without expecting the legitimate owners of that signal to get a little peeved.
I really have no idea why they're so upset, iCraveTV isnt filtering out the ads and placing their own in, the ads are still there, uncut, uncensored, they've left the stream alone, the people who bought the ads are getting a WIDER audience because of iCraveTV, for nothing.
That notwithstanding, how can iCraveTV, a Canadian company, operating within Canadian law, which has disclaimers, and even a area code check to futilely filter out non Canadians from watching it, get sued in a US court where US laws apply? This makes no sense. If they want to sue iCraveTV they should sue them up here.
Let's not let the overwhelming trend of attacking people for defending their IP extend into areas it doesn't belong. When someone tries to patent "One-click shopping", I understand the community getting irate. But iCrave is not the good guy here, they're the leech. And I say that as a loyal customer of theirs.:)
They arent leeching, they're providing the stream uncut, INCLUDING all the ads, they're just rebroadcasting the ENTIRE stream online, which is totally legal here, possibly to people (like me) who cant even get cable in his area.
These are the games that keep me rebooting into windows:
Need for Speed III Need for Speed IV Falcon 4.0 Starcraft Mechwarrior 2 - Netmech Mechwarrior 3 Final Fantasy 7
Yes, Starcraft plays well in WINE, and I did get Netmech running in DOSEMU, HOWEVER, I play them over the net via Kali, and Kali95 does NOT work in WINE, and I did get KaliDOS on the net from within DOSEMU, however, the network code slowed to a virtual standstill when I tried to play a netmech game (netmech ran beautifully..)
What really pisses me off is that in the "president" of the DVD-CCA's little Affidavit, we get the following:
23. Gilmore goes on to state that "[o]ne major reason [for making such copies] is to allow Linux developers and users to watch their DVDs on their non-Windows computers." (Id. at 10). Linux is an alternative operating system to Windows. It was developed as an "open" system which is available at no charge to the user. To date, no person or entity has taken a license from DVD CCA or its predecessor to use CSS in a Linux application. If a person or entity were prepared to take a license on the same terms as existing licensees, such a license would be granted. At that point, Linux users could lawfully view motion pictures on their non-Windows operating system. Until then, Linux users have no "right," via a "hack" around other software licenses, like the Xing license, to gain access to this proprietary technology.
So right there the truth comes out, this is what they're after all along. We have the right to buy the fucking DVD's, but we have no right to PLAY them without also buying a fucking player? We can't make one ourselves? What kind of logic is that? Why isnt the FSF legal team helping the EFF in this? Why isn't many other organisations helping in this effort? It affects us and them alike!
Next thing you know we wont have a right to make our own OS for our computers.
I checked out the affidavit from "BRUCE E. BOYDEN, ESQ." one of the DVD lawyers, from 2600 and in it were these points:
5. Typing a URL into a web browser such as Internet Explorer or Netscape causes the user's computer to request a copy of a web page from the server computer, which is downloaded to the user's hard drive. Netscape or Internet Explorer then displays the information that was downloaded. Another, faster way to move from one page to another is by use of "hypertext links", which are URLs embedded in a web page that, when clicked on with a mouse, act the same as typing in the URL into the browser manually.
6. Clicking on a link can not only download web pages; it can also download larger files containing programs such as DeCSS. Many of the pages we visited had such links to files containing DeCSS on the web sites' computers. When clicked on, these files were then downloaded to our computers. I saved each file to a separately named directory on my own computer, then printed out a copy of my computer screen showing the downloaded file in that directory.
WHAT?! You don't need the actual file just a SCREEN SHOT of a directory listing?! Holy cow, that file could be the Department of Corrections Sanitary Statements for all we know! I really hope the EFF doesn't let the DVD lawyers get away with this!
Slashdot Mirror
I've been getting this with a LOT of content lately.... And I dont really know why. I got it with icravetv just before they shut down, but it worked the week before.
Only thing I can say: Real, get off your asses and update this year old alpha already!
-- iCEBaLM
This is not cool. And this bit about abridging free speech to only poitical matters: no way. I'm sorry; the US government is bad in a lot of ways, but it's done one thing I'm proud of: it's the only nation with a free speech clause in its Constitution.
May I take this time to point out how ignorant you are and direct you to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
You might enjoy freedom 2 b, I know I do.
-- iCEBaLM
No I'm wondering why people get all in arms about people complaining about taxpayer money going to subsidize someone's porn surfing habit at a library.
/.?
Are you completely clueless or do you just play someone who is on
When you want to view porn, wheres the first place you go, a public library? Give me a break.
The publicness and openness of the library, for 99% of people today, would inhibit them from checking out porn. You wouldnt be nervous and/or apprihensive checking out some muff at a local library? Heh. People doing this intentionally would be such a small fraction of reality it isnt even funny.
-- iCEBaLM
Interesting, my favorite distrib is Slack also, been using it for years now, and by no means should be come in last against any other distrib.
:)
Slack is small, extremely easy to download, the install can be daunting for non-experienced users, but its lean, mean, has great defaults, the init scripts are clean, etc.
I'd suggest something about Slackware users and this train of thought, but I'd get moderated down.
But really, having no centrally "best" distribution is a Good Thing(tm), those commercial apps that I notice are only for "Red Hat Linux" will start having to be more standardized.
-- iCEBaLM
I find all these "the best distribution" awards are really popularity contests and not really designed to show what is the best. But really, is there a best? More importantly, should there be a best?
I dont think so on both counts. Every distribution has quirks, pros/cons, etc that turn some users on, some off, and make some indifferent. Not to mention that having one "best" distribution that *ahem* "everybody" would use would be a Bad Thing(tm) for various reasons.
In the end, SuSE is a quite popular distribution, but the best? No, I dont think so, and I'm glad its not.
-- iCEBaLM
As far as I know, this isn't the case - there are plenty of Region 0 (which I believe = unencrypted) titles about, espcially the non-movie titles like sports, documentaries and porn...
Hrmm, I doubt it would be unencrypted, just able to be played in any DVD player region? However I'm not entirely sure of this, this is the first I have heard of region 0, I was under the impression that DVD players would not play titles which did not have CSS in place.
I'd like to get more information on this, you would still need a larger disc then is available, to copy the majority of titles.
-- iCEBaLM
Reading the opinion, I kind of get the feeling that the piracy is more of a PR smokescreen than anything else. Oh, there's the usual throwing of legal gunk against the wall to see what will stick. But the key question is whether, under DMCA, creating a program that defeats a technical copy protection scheme and/or redistributing such a program is illegal even if defeating the technical copy protection measures is useless for making infringing copies.
If I were a defendant I would try to argue that CSS is NOT copy protection, however access protection, therefore not covered by the DMCA at all. I think that would be a wise decision for the EFF to follow.
-- iCEBaLM
As far as piracy goes, there's no doubt something like DeCSS might be useful if you had swiped a supply of blanks and had plenty of time on your hands to knock off one or two copies, but DeCSS as far as I can see is neither technically necessary nor sufficient for DVD copying.
To copy a DVD successfully to another disc capable of being played in a DVD player you would NOT use DeCSS AT ALL, and here is why:
1. Consumer available DVD blank discs currently only hold 4 GIG of data, most DVD movies run about 6 to 10 GIG.
2. Consumer available DVD blank discs have the tracks where the DVD player expects the CSS keys to be PRE-WRITTEN with 0's.
3. You don't want to break the encryption, you NEED the encryption IN PLACE, as DVD players will NOT play unencrypted DVD movies, they expect CSS and will not play if it is not there.
The absolute only way to copy a DVD disc so that you have two DVD player readable identical discs is to get your own stamping machine, and you would make a bit-for-bit copy with the encryption IN PLACE, as DVD players expect CSS to be there, these run into thousands of dollars, not really economical if you're only making a few copies for friends huh? However they are economical with big pirates in Asia for instance.
-- iCEBaLM
Well it does protect ACCESS in the mindset of PLAYING it, maybe what Ms. Gross should have inserted there is that it does not protect COPYING, it only protects ACCESS for PLAYING.
-- iCEBaLM
I have no idea Bruce, you'll have to ask copyleft about that. Would be a good idea tho.
-- iCEBaLM
If I had a credit card I would Bruce, however I did step up and Became a Doe. Just got mail today that they're past the break even mark and the shirts will probably be printed, I encourage others to buy a One of a Kind shirt also!
-- iCEBaLM, Doe #140
The MPAA's strategy is very clear.
Propagandize with their money far and wide to sway the public in their favor, link "hackers" with sexy words like "narcotics", and portray them as theives. This is how they expect to win the general populaces support, and right now its working.
Our problem is we have no voice ourside our own circles. The MPAA can write propaganda articles and get them published in the LA Times, but what about us? We have no mass market voice, and they know that and are trying to capitalize on it.
What we need is a stronger voice, one which can get out into major papers, out to the public, we need to tell people whats really going on. Unfortunately I don't really know how we can do this, maybe someone else has a good idea?
-- iCEBaLM
From what I'm reading here, it seems that the Sorenson codec is the only one which matters anymore.
And you'd be right, all the new quicktime movies use the sorenson codec, every single one of them, even that TIE-tanic spoof did. You cant watch quicktime movies anymore without sorenson, its impossible.
Come on. QuickTime works fine, even if you believe Apple touts it as the end all be all cross platform media streaming format (wow, that's a lot of qualifiers). You're forgeting operating systems when you say 2. I'll leave you to figure out your mistakes...
Make no mistake about it, the player is useless without the right codecs, There's a real player 5 for linux, and it works (almost) fine, I challenge you to play any G2 stream with it, you wont be able to, not the right codec. The G2 Linux player has been Alpha since MAY, and it too is getting venerable (cant use it with icravetv anymore I've noticed).
Streaming media, and really any media for that matter, is all about codecs, you can release a quicktime player for any OS, but if it doesnt support all the codecs, you're toast.
I stand by my original claim, Quicktime is only released and supported on 2 operating systems, I made no mistake.
-- iCEBaLM
... a beowulf cluster of these would be able to crack CSS in 6 months :)
If you could get them on a network, of course...
Ahh, the good old days of sneekernet.
I remmeber my high school had whole labs of these, and during the era of the C64 a friend of mine brought me over to his house, showed me a PET and asked me "Is this thing any good?", my reply "dude, its not even color!", this must have been atleast 15 years ago....
--- iCEBaLM
The RealVideo stream contains *MORE* than just the original content, it contains extra advertsing infromation present at the side and bottom of the video signal, and this is what they will be prosectued over.
Well actually it doesnt, because those ads are comming from a separate streams. The TV video is one stream, the ads at the bottom are another, and the ads at the right side are another. If you knew the URL to just the TV stream, you could get it without the other two ad streams, but thats not how they have it setup on their site.
-- iCEBaLM
Apple doesn't give a fuck if you 'approve' of thier licence. Neither do I.
:)
You forgot Linux Rulez!!!!! dumbass.
Heh, and nobody gives a fuck about AC's, so I guess we're (kindof?) even.
-- iCEBaLM
Apple owns the specs to those CODECs and has absolutely no obligation, reason, or interest in releasing them to 'the community'. I'm sure someone can purchase those specs to create their own player if they'd like, but no one will. They won't because then they would have to charge money for their application.
Apple seems to have and exclusive license on the Sorensen codec, so even if someone wanted to, I dont think they could license it.
The real problem I have with Apple is they bring out their over-restrictive ASPL, and "open source" parts of what they call "darwin" (OS X) and expect people to code for them for free, they also tout QuickTime as the end all be all cross platform internet media streaming format, and its supported on what, 2 operating systems? Give me a break.
Their "open source" strategy seems to be to use as many buzzwords as possible to create mind-share, and maybe they'll sell a couple more G4s.
-- iCEBaLM
We have about 2.4 devout readers on our various sites (notably including http://slashdot.org and http://freshmeat.net), and we're starting to move into video news production, so this is a substantial offer.
All of 2.4 readers? heh, thats pretty funny. But just as an aside, where did you pick this little snippet up?
-- iCEBaLM
Icrave, by wrapping their own banners around the outside of the signal (sort of shrinking the original signal).. well.. that seems to constitute 'modifying' the content of the signal.
Thats rediculous! rofl! With this logic, you're going to now ban any TV with more pixels then the NTSC specifies? They aren't modifying the signal in any way, with or without the ads on the bottom and the right, the signal would HAVE to be rastered smaller to be useful to anyone who doesn't have an OC3. Not to mention, I can click "Double Size" or "Full Screen" in real player, clicking that am I also modifying the content?
-- iCEBaLM
'm not knocking, I use it all the time, but let's avoid getting too up-in-arms about this. You all know as well as I do that iCrave has always been a little questionable.
:)
In Canada its not questionable at all, its well within the law.
This isn't about Big Bad Corporate America stifling the global evolution of the net, either. When those networks sell advertising, it's with the understanding from their customers that they will have 30 seconds of captive audience. You can't run a site that sponges off other people's (very very large) investments for your own personal gain without expecting the legitimate owners of that signal to get a little peeved.
I really have no idea why they're so upset, iCraveTV isnt filtering out the ads and placing their own in, the ads are still there, uncut, uncensored, they've left the stream alone, the people who bought the ads are getting a WIDER audience because of iCraveTV, for nothing.
That notwithstanding, how can iCraveTV, a Canadian company, operating within Canadian law, which has disclaimers, and even a area code check to futilely filter out non Canadians from watching it, get sued in a US court where US laws apply? This makes no sense. If they want to sue iCraveTV they should sue them up here.
Let's not let the overwhelming trend of attacking people for defending their IP extend into areas it doesn't belong. When someone tries to patent "One-click shopping", I understand the community getting irate. But iCrave is not the good guy here, they're the leech. And I say that as a loyal customer of theirs.
They arent leeching, they're providing the stream uncut, INCLUDING all the ads, they're just rebroadcasting the ENTIRE stream online, which is totally legal here, possibly to people (like me) who cant even get cable in his area.
-- iCEBaLM
These are the games that keep me rebooting into windows:
Need for Speed III
Need for Speed IV
Falcon 4.0
Starcraft
Mechwarrior 2 - Netmech
Mechwarrior 3
Final Fantasy 7
Yes, Starcraft plays well in WINE, and I did get Netmech running in DOSEMU, HOWEVER, I play them over the net via Kali, and Kali95 does NOT work in WINE, and I did get KaliDOS on the net from within DOSEMU, however, the network code slowed to a virtual standstill when I tried to play a netmech game (netmech ran beautifully..)
Future games that NEED to come out for Linux:
Halo
Diablo 2
Warcraft 3
-- iCEBaLM
Next thing you know, we'll be getting posts here such as:
"Judge Elfving, I want yout body naked and petrified"
In an attempt to get it entered into court documents... Now isnt that a thought...
-- iCEBaLM
What really pisses me off is that in the "president" of the DVD-CCA's little Affidavit, we get the following:
23. Gilmore goes on to state that "[o]ne major reason [for making such copies] is to allow Linux developers and users to watch their DVDs on their non-Windows computers." (Id. at 10). Linux is an alternative operating system to Windows. It was developed as an "open" system which is available at no charge to the user. To date, no person or entity has taken a license from DVD CCA or its predecessor to use CSS in a Linux application. If a person or entity were prepared to take a license on the same terms as existing licensees, such a license would be granted. At that point, Linux users could lawfully view motion pictures on their non-Windows operating system. Until then, Linux users have no "right," via a "hack" around other software licenses, like the Xing license, to gain access to this proprietary technology.
So right there the truth comes out, this is what they're after all along. We have the right to buy the fucking DVD's, but we have no right to PLAY them without also buying a fucking player? We can't make one ourselves? What kind of logic is that? Why isnt the FSF legal team helping the EFF in this? Why isn't many other organisations helping in this effort? It affects us and them alike!
Next thing you know we wont have a right to make our own OS for our computers.
-- iCEBaLM
I checked out the affidavit from "BRUCE E. BOYDEN, ESQ." one of the DVD lawyers, from 2600 and in it were these points:
5. Typing a URL into a web browser such as Internet Explorer or Netscape causes the user's computer to request a copy of a web page from the server computer, which is downloaded to the user's hard drive. Netscape or Internet Explorer then displays the information that was downloaded. Another, faster way to move from one page to another is by use of "hypertext links", which are URLs embedded in a web page that, when clicked on with a mouse, act the same as typing in the URL into the browser manually.
6. Clicking on a link can not only download web pages; it can also download larger files containing programs such as DeCSS. Many of the pages we visited had such links to files containing DeCSS on the web sites' computers. When clicked on, these files were then downloaded to our computers. I saved each file to a separately named directory on my own computer, then printed out a copy of my computer screen showing the downloaded file in that directory.
WHAT?! You don't need the actual file just a SCREEN SHOT of a directory listing?! Holy cow, that file could be the Department of Corrections Sanitary Statements for all we know! I really hope the EFF doesn't let the DVD lawyers get away with this!
-- iCEBaLM
ugh, I screwed up one of the links..
The Witches Voice is really here.
When do we get the option of editing our own comments after they've been posted Rob?
-- iCEBaLM