that's what I was saying--I don't get to watch DVDs. I'm not happy with that, but it's the truth of the matter.
What I was also saying is that CSS is trying to enforce the law, as is any other copy protection. And actually, I know lots of people who haven't been busted for pirating lots of RIAA-owned music and expensive software. So I guess I've just proven myself wrong and given a legitimate reason for CSS?
But as many have said, copy protection nulls consumer privillages that do not violate copyright laws, and may even be expected under fair use clauses. It also nulls the public domain and perpetuates copyrights. Maybe that's all fine and legal, but I'm not happy with it. The public domain is a very important part of copyright law, that's why it's part of copyright law.
Oh well, the law is at is it; I guess I'll just twiddle my thumbs.
What about those without TVs? $59 for a DVD player + $69 for a 13" TV + $20 if TV or DVD player doesn't come with cables = $130 (+ tax, if applicable) for crappy DVD watching. Plus you need some floor or table space. It all seems too inconvinient for me. So I guess I just shouldn't [give the MPAA money to] watch DVDs. Why should I have to buy redundant equipment? What ever happened to letting law enforcement officials enforce law?
Slashdot Mirror
that's what I was saying--I don't get to watch DVDs. I'm not happy with that, but it's the truth of the matter.
What I was also saying is that CSS is trying to enforce the law, as is any other copy protection. And actually, I know lots of people who haven't been busted for pirating lots of RIAA-owned music and expensive software. So I guess I've just proven myself wrong and given a legitimate reason for CSS?
But as many have said, copy protection nulls consumer privillages that do not violate copyright laws, and may even be expected under fair use clauses. It also nulls the public domain and perpetuates copyrights.
Maybe that's all fine and legal, but I'm not happy with it.
The public domain is a very important part of copyright law, that's why it's part of copyright law.
Oh well, the law is at is it; I guess I'll just twiddle my thumbs.
What about those without TVs? $59 for a DVD player + $69 for a 13" TV + $20 if TV or DVD player doesn't come with cables = $130 (+ tax, if applicable) for crappy DVD watching. Plus you need some floor or table space. It all seems too inconvinient for me. So I guess I just shouldn't [give the MPAA money to] watch DVDs.
Why should I have to buy redundant equipment? What ever happened to letting law enforcement officials enforce law?