Linked by Smith Johnson on Thu 27th Sep 2007 15:22 UTC
Permalink for comment 274893
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-10
Thanks a lot. I did not realize a complete backup copy of a movie or album is allowed under Fair Use. Does anyone know why no media company has ever been sued for this.
On your other point, DRM IS DEFINITELY added overhead and is bad (as far as I can see) but my point was that people are agreeing to it when they buy DRM'ed stuff so pointless blaming MS for covering their ass. I am guessing half the idea behind MS's implementation might just be their legal dept saying that we better include it before RIAA sues under DMCA for "facilitating violation" like they did with DVD X Copy, etc. Because when you think about it MS has limited gains from implementing DRM in Windows.